Skip to main content

Full text of "The dolphin in history;"

See other formats



i  ai 

:  -D 

=  a 

1  m 

;  CD 

The  Dionysos  Cup  by  Exekias,  c.  540  B.C. 

Staatliche  AntH{ensammluTigen,  Munich.  Photograph  by  Dr.  Max  Hirmer. 

The  Dolphin 


Papers  delivered  hy  Ashley  Montagu 
and  John  C.  Lilly  at  a  symposium 
at  the  Clark  Library ^  2j  October  ig6z 


f  K  '.  rwr> 


University  of  California,  Los  Angeles 



.ECENTLY  THE  DOLPHIN  has  bccome  the  focus  of 
much  scientific  interest  and  investigation  which  have  led  to 
flattering  pronouncements  about  its  remarkable  inteUigence, 
amiability,  and  astonishing  friendliness  towards  man.  It  was  in 
consequence  of  such  activities  that  a  symposium  was  held  at  the 
William  Andrews  Clark  Memorial  Library  to  consider  the  back- 
ground to  contemporary  studies  of  the  dolphin.  The  presenta- 
tions of  Dr.  Ashley  Montagu  and  Dr.  John  C.  Lilly  were  re- 
ceived so  favorably  that  it  was  decided  to  make  them  more 
widely  available  in  the  present  form. 

As  will  be  readily  apparent  to  any  reader,  Dr.  Montagu  has 
demonstrated  conclusively  that  had  the  writings  of  the  ancients 
been  heeded  we  should  long  since  have  paid  proper  respect  to 
this  intelligent  mammal,  and  Dr.  Lilly  has  reinforced  such 
classical  appreciation  by  an  account  of  his  own  astonishing  ob- 
servations of  dolphin  behavior.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  these  two 
accounts  will  contribute  to  a  lasting  appreciation  of  our  remark- 
able aquatic  friend. 

C.  D.  O'Malley 



by  Ashley  Montagu 

The  friendly  Dolphin,  while  within  the  maine, 
At  libertie  delightes,  to  sport  and  play, 
Himself e  is  fresh,  and  doth  no  whit  retaine 
The  brinish  saltnes  of  the  boundless  Sea 
Wherein  he  lives.  Such  is  the  secret  s\ill 
Of  Nature  wording,  all  thinges  at  her  will. 

Henry  Peacham,  Mi?ierva  Britanna,  1612 

The  History  of  the  Dolphin 


/  hat/e  met  with  a  story,  which,  although  authenticated 
by  undoubted  evidence,  loo\s  very  like  a  fable. 

Pliny  the  Younger 



.HE  HISTORY  of  the  dolphiii  is  one  of  the  most  fasci- 
nating and  instructive  in  the  historiography  and  the  history  of 
ideas  in  the  western  world.  Indeed,  it  provides  one  of  the  most 
illuminating  examples  of  what  has  probably  occurred  many 
times  in  human  culture — a  virtually  complete  loss  of  knowledge, 
at  least  in  most  segments  of  the  culture,  of  what  was  formerly 
well  understood  by  generations  of  men.  "Not  in  entire  forget- 
fulness"  in  some  regions  of  the  world,  but  certainly  in  "a  sleep 
and  a  forgetting"  in  the  most  sophisticated  centers  of  the  western 

Dolphins  are  mammals.  They  belong  in  the  order  Cetacea, 
suborder  Odontoceti,  family  Delphinidae.  Within  the  Delphini- 
dae  there  are  some  twenty-two  genera  and  about  fifty-five 
species.  The  count  includes  the  Killer  Whale,  the  False  Killer 
Whale,  the  White  Whale,  and  the  Pilot  Whale,  all  of  which  are 
true  dolphins.  There  are  two  subfamilies,  the  Delphinapterinae, 
consisting  of  the  two  genera  Monodon  monocerus ,  the  Narwhal, 
and  Delphiiiapterus  leucas,  the  White  Whale  or  Beluga.  These 
two  genera  are  distinguished  by  the  fact  that  none  of  the  neck 
vertebrae  are  fused,  whereas  in  all  remaining  genera,  embraced 
in  the  subfamily  Delphininae,  at  least  the  first  and  second  neck 
vertebrae  are  fused. 

It  was  Aristotle  in  his  History  of  Animals  (521b)  who  first 
classified  whales,  porpoises,  and  dolphins  as  Cetacea,  ra  ktity] 
dlov  SeXifLs  Kal  (pcoKaiva  Kal  (paKaiva.  Aristotle's  account  of  the 
Cetacea  was  astonishingly  accurately  written,  and  quite  evi- 
dently from  firsthand  knowledge  of  these  animals. 

While  most  dolphins  are  inhabitants  of  the  seas,  there  are 
some  that  live  in  rivers,  and  quite  a  few  that  are  denizens  of 
fresh-water  rivers  removed  many  miles  from  the  sea.  With  one 
exception  the  diet  of  dolphins  is  principally  fish.  The  one  excep- 
tion is  Sotalia  teuszii,  which  lives  in  the  Kamerun  River,  and  is 
believed  to  feed  exclusively  on  vegetable  matter.  The  Ting  Ling 
dolphin  (Lipotes  vexillifer)  lives  in  Ting  Ling  Lake,  six  hun- 
dred miles  up  the  Yang-tse-Kiang.  Another  dolphin,  the  Susu 
or  Ganges  dolphin  {Platanista  gangetica)  of  Brahmapootra,  the 
Ganges,  and  the  Indus,  has  lenseless  eyes  and  is  almost  blind. 
The  fresh-water  dolphins  belong  in  the  family  Platanistidae. 

It  is  of  interest  to  note  that,  in  connection  with  the  vegetable 
feeding  habits  of  the  Kamerun  dolphin,  Lycophron,  in  his  Alex- 
andra, makes  his  dolphins  feed  on  trees,  and  Ovid,  in  the  Meta- 
morphoses (III,  I,  202),  describes  a  flood  in  which  the  dolphins 
take  possession  of  the  woods.  Nonnus  Panopolitanus,  in  the 
Dionysiaca  (VI,  265-266),  also  describes  dolphins  as  feeding  on 

The  normal  range  of  length  of  dolphins  is  from  5  to  14  feet; 
the  larger  species,  the  whales,  are  considerably  longer.  Brain 
weight  is  between  1600  and  1700  grams  in  the  familiar  dolphins, 
and  reaches  9200  grams  and  more  in  the  whales.  The  large  brain 
is  associated  with  what,  all  observers  familiar  with  these  animals 
agree,  is  a  quite  considerable  intelligence. 

Here  we  must  pause  to  make  a  plea  for  the  proper  usage  of 
common  names.  The  term  "porpoise"  refers  to  the  small,  beak- 
less  Delphinidae,  which  have  a  triangular  dorsal  fin  and  spade- 
shaped  teeth.  The  name  "dolphin"  embraces  all  other  members 
of  the  family,  except  the  larger  forms,  which  are  called  whales. 

The  porpoises  mostly  belong  in  the  genus  Phocaena,  the  best 
known  species  of  which,  the  Common  Porpoise  {Phocaena  pho- 
caena), never  reaches  a  length  exceeding  6  feet  and  weighs  lOO 
to  120  pounds.  There  are  some  six  species.  The  finless  black  por- 
poise constitutes  the  only  other  genus  with  a  single  species 
Neomeris  phocaenoides. 

All  porpoises  are  dolphins.  The  Bottle-Nosed  Dolphin,  Tur- 
siops  truncatus,  is  sometimes  called  a  porpoise.  This  is  incorrect. 
Tur slops  is  a  true  dolphin,  and  should  not  be  called  what  it  is  not. 

Here  we  shall  be  principally  concerned  with  the  Bottle-Nosed 
Dolphin  and  with  the  Common  Dolphin.  The  Bottle-Nosed 
Dolphin  has  a  short,  well-defined  snout  two  or  three  inches  long, 
and  is  characterized  by  a  prominent  fin  in  the  middle  of  the 
back.  Coloration  is  dark  above  and  light  below.  Gestation  lasts 
some  ten  months,  birth  is  monotocous,  and  the  young  are 
suckled  for  about  i8  months.  The  tail  is  delivered  first,  and  the 
infant,  about  three  feet  long  and  weighing  about  twenty-five 
pounds,  is  immediately  quite  active,  though  much  in  need  of  the 
care  of  its  devoted  mother.  The  infant  will  eventually  grow  to  be 
between  ii  and  12  feet  in  length,  and  weigh  about  300  kilo- 
grams. Tursiops  has  an  enormously  wide  range,  being  common- 
est along  the  Atlantic  coast  of  America,  from  Maine  to  Florida, 
and  occurs  in  the  Bay  of  Biscay  in  the  Mediterranean  Sea,  and  as 
far  south  as  New  Zealand. 

The  Common  Dolphin,  Delphinus  delphis,  is  readily  recog- 
nized by  its  well-defined  narrow  beak  and  distinctive  coloration. 
The  beak  is  some  5  to  6  inches  narrower  and  finer  than  in  the 
Bottle-Nosed  Dolphin,  and  is  sharply  marked  off  by  a  deep  V- 
shaped  groove  from  the  low  reclining  forehead.  The  Common 
Dolphin  reaches  a  length  up  to  8|/^  feet.  Its  range  of  distribution 
is  very  wide,  for  it  may  be  met  in  any  temperate  or  warm  sea 
throughout  the  world,  and  occurs  at  times  in  vast  schools. 

Whether  the  dolphin  of  classical  antiquity  is  Delphinus  or 
Tursiops  is  not  usually  determinable,  although  each  undoubt- 

edly  played  its  independent  role  in  the  stories  told  of  dol- 
phins. From  the  recorded  evidence  available  to  us  it  is  clear 
that,  except  for  the  larger  species,  the  whales,  all  dolphins  ap- 
pear to  be  characterized  by  playfulness  and  friendliness  toward 
man.  There  are,  however,  differences  which  appear  to  express 
themselves  mostly  in  captivity.  At  least,  Tursiops  adjusts  much 
better  to  captivity  than  does  Delphinus.  At  marine  studios 
Tursiops  has  established  itself  as  a  highly  intelligent,  playful, 
and  friendly  performer.  Delphinus,  on  the  other  hand,  while 
naturally  all  these  things,  in  captivity  tends  to  be  timid  and  not 
very  playful. 

The  Common  and  Bottle-Nosed  Dolphins  are  those  best 
known  to  the  western  world,  but  many  of  the  traits  which  have 
recently  been  rediscovered  concerning  these  creatures  have  been 
well  known  to  other  peoples  for  millennia.  It  is  only  a  certain 
segment  of  the  western  world,  its  more  sophisticated  representa- 
tion, and  particularly  the  learned  world,  which  dismissed  as 
myths  the  tales  told  about  dolphins  in  classical  antiquity.  And 
this  is  the  real  burden  of  the  story  I  have  to  tell  you.  Some  of 
these  antique  tales  may  have  been  myths,  but  as  we  shall  see, 
many  of  them  were  not,  and  undoubtedly  a  number  of  the 
myths  were  based  on  real  events  partially  embroidered  by  the 
imagination  and  improved,  like  good  wine,  by  time.  But  good 
wine  needs  no  bush,  and  I  shall  sample  this  wine  as  palatably 
as  I  find  it. 

The  earliest  representation  of  a  dolphin  I  have  been  able  to 
find  is  from  a  pictographic  seal  from  Crete,  estimated  to  date 
from  3500  to  2200  B.C.  The  earliest  painting  of  a  dolphin  thus 
far  recovered  is  from  the  ancient  Peloponnesian  city  of  Tiryns. 
The  date  is  about  1600  B.C.  In  that  city  it  is  also  represented 
in  stucco  floors.  Several  good  examples  of  dolphins  are  furnished 
by  seventh  century  Corinthian  art.  The  dolphin  is  also  well  rep- 
resented in  Minoan  art.  In  Cyprus  it  is  frequently  represented 
in  Late  Helladic  vases,  shards,  amphorae,  in  metalwork,  en- 

gravings,  and  in  stucco  floors  as  at  Tiryns.  Among  the  impor- 
tations from  Crete  into  Helladic  art  appear  to  have  been  certain 
styhzed  forms  of  the  dolphin. 

An  early  literary  reference  to  the  dolphin  occurs  in  Aesop's 
fable,  "The  Monkey  and  the  Dolphin."  During  a  violent  storm 
a  ship  was  capsized,  and  among  those  thrown  into  the  water  was 
a  monkey.  Observing  its  distress  a  dolphin  came  to  its  rescue, 
and  taking  the  monkey  upon  its  back  the  dolphin  headed  for 
shore.  Opposite  Piraeus,  the  harbor  of  Athens,  the  dolphin  in- 
quired of  the  monkey  whether  he  was  an  Athenian.  "Oh,  yes," 
replied  the  monkey,  "and  from  one  of  the  best  families."  "Then 
you  know  Piraeus,"  said  the  dolphin.  "Very  well,  indeed,"  said 
the  monkey,  "he  is  one  of  my  most  intimate  friends."  Where- 
upon, outraged  by  so  gross  a  deceit,  the  dolphin  took  a  deep  dive 
and  left  the  monkey  to  its  fate. 

I  take  it  that  ever  since  that  day  monkeys  have  very  sensibly 
refrained  from  speech.  It  is  far  better  to  remain  silent  even  at 
the  risk  of  being  taken  for  a  fool  or  a  rogue,  than  to  open  one's 
mouth  and  remove  all  doubt. 

Aesop  flourished  about  600  B.C.  His  story  suggests  a  consid- 
erable knowledge  of  the  ways  of  dolphins,  and  this  indicates 
that  knowledge  of  the  dolphin  was  already  old  in  his  time. 

There  are  several  variant  Greek  myths  on  the  origin  of  the 
dolphin.  All  of  them  relate  to  Dionysos.  In  one  version  Dionysos 
is  an  adult,  in  another  he  is  a  child.  The  first  group  of  legends 
represent  the  epiphany  of  Dionysos,  symbolizing  the  battle  be- 
tween winter  and  summer.  Winter  is  represented  by  the  death 
of  Dionysos  who  disappears  into  the  water,  from  which  he  is 
brought  back  on  the  top  of  a  dolphin  as  the  returning  springtime 
(Apollodorus,  III,  5,  3).  Another  version  has  Dionysos,  whether 
as  child  or  adult  varies,  being  conveyed  by  ship  to  Naxos  by 
Tyrrhenian  mariners.  The  latter  conceive  the  idea  of  kidnaping 
him.  Dionysos  senses  their  treachery,  and  bidding  his  com- 
panions strike  up  on  their  musical  instruments,  he  produces  a 


Bacchic  wild  dance  in  the  mariners  who  throw  themselves  over- 
board and  are  changed  into  dolphins. 

The  popular  belief  in  antiquity  in  the  human  intelligence  of 
dolphins  and  their  kindly  feeling  toward  man  was  explained 
by  the  ancient  writers  in  the  light  of  the  transformation  of  the 
Tyrrhenian  pirates  into  dolphins.  (See  Lucian,  Marine  Dia- 
logues, 8;  Oppian,  Halieutica,  I,  649-654,  1098,  V,  422,  5i9f; 
Porphyry,  De  Abstinentia,  III,  16.)  As  Oppian  (I,  1089)  in  his 
Halieutica  has  it,  in  William  Diaper's  charming  translation: 

So  Dolphins  teem,  whom  subject  Fish  revere. 
And  show  the  smiling  Seas  their  Infant-Heir. 
All  other  Kinds,  whom  Parent-Seas  confine. 
Dolphins  excell;  that  Race  is  all  divine. 
Dolphins  were  Men  (Tradition  hands  the  Tale) 
Laborious  Swains  bred  on  the  Tuscan  Vale: 
Transform'd  by  Bacchus,  and  by  Neptune  lov'd, 
They  all  the  Pleasures  of  the  Deep  improv'd. 
When  new-made  Fish  the  God's  Command  obey'd, 
Plung'd  in  the  Waves,  and  untry'd  Fins  displayed, 
No  further  Change  relenting  Bacchus  wrought, 
Nor  have  the  Dolphins  all  the  Man  forgot; 
The  conscious  Soul  retains  her  former  Thought. 

The  god  of  the  golden  trident  who  rules  over  the  seas,  Posei- 
don, would  not  have  prospered  in  his  wooing  of  Amphitrite  if 
it  had  not  been  for  the  assistance  of  a  dolphin,  who  apprized 
Poseidon  of  her  hiding-place.  For  this  service,  as  is  well-known, 
Poseidon  set  the  dolphin  among  the  stars  in  the  constellation 
which  bears  its  name  to  this  day. 

It  is  interesting  in  this  connection  that  in  a  modern  Greek  folk- 
tale from  Zacynthos,  Poseidon  changes  a  hero  who  has  fallen 
into  the  sea  into  a  dolphin  until  such  time  as  he  should  find  a 
maiden  ready  to  be  his  wife.  After  some  time  the  dolphin  rescues 
a  shipwrecked  king  and  his  daughter,  the  princess  by  way  of 
reward  takes  him  for  her  husband,  and  the  spell  is  broken  (Bern- 
hard  Schmidt,  Das  VolI{sleben  der  Neugriechen,  p.  135). 


The  cult  of  Apollo  Delphinus  was  initiated,  so  legend  has  it, 
by  Icadius  who,  leaving  his  native  land  of  Lycia,  which  he  had 
named  for  his  mother,  set  out  for  Italy.  Shipwrecked  on  the  way, 
he  was  taken  on  the  back  of  a  dolphin,  which  set  him  down  near 
Mount  Parnassus,  where  he  founded  a  temple  to  his  father 
Apollo,  and  called  the  place  Delphi  after  the  dolphin.  For  this 
reason  the  dolphin  became  among  the  things  most  sacred  to 
Apollo  (Servius,  Commentarii  in  Vergilii  Aeneidos,  III,  332; 
also  Cornificius  Longus,  De  Etymis  Deorum). 

Herodotos,  writing  of  Periander  (fl.  600  B.C.)  tyrant  of  Cor- 
inth, tells  one  of  the  most  famous  of  all  stories  of  the  dolphin 
(it  is  mentioned  by  Shakespeare  in  the  first  act  of  Twelfth 
Night).  "In  his  time,"  writes  Herodotos  (b.  484  B.C.),  "a  very 
wonderful  thing  is  said  to  have  happened.  The  Corinthians  and 
the  Lesbians  agree  in  their  account  of  the  matter.  They  relate 
that  Arion  of  Methymna,  who,  as  a  player  on  the  lyre,  was  sec- 
ond to  no  man  living  at  that  time,  and  who  was,  so  far  as  we 
know,  the  first  to  invent  the  didiyrambic  measure,  to  give  it  its 
name,  and  to  conduct  in  it  at  Corinth,  was  carried  to  Taenarum 
on  the  back  of  a  dolphin. 

"He  had  lived,  it  is  said,  at  the  court  of  Periander,  when  a 
longing  came  upon  him  to  sail  across  to  Italy  and  Sicily.  Having 
made  rich  profits  in  those  parts,  he  wanted  to  recross  the  seas 
to  Corinth.  He  therefore  hired  a  vessel,  the  crew  of  which  were 
Corinthians,  thinking  that  there  was  no  people  in  whom  he 
could  more  safely  confide;  and,  going  on  board,  he  set  sail  from 
Tarentum.  The  sailors,  however,  when  they  reached  the  open 
sea,  formed  a  plot  to  throw  him  overboard  and  seize  upon  his 
riches.  Discovering  their  design,  he  fell  on  his  knees,  beseeching 
them  to  spare  his  life,  and  making  them  welcome  to  his  money. 
But  they  refused;  and  required  him  either  to  kill  himself  out- 
right, if  he  wished  for  a  grave  on  the  dry  land,  or  without  loss 
of  time  to  leap  overboard  into  the  sea.  In  this  strait  Arion  begged 
them,  since  such  was  their  pleasure,  to  allow  him  to  mount  upon 

the  quarter-deck,  dressed  in  his  full  costume,  and  there  to  play 
and  sing,  and  promising  that,  as  soon  as  his  song  was  ended,  he 
would  destroy  himself.  Delighted  at  the  prospect  of  hearing  the 
very  best  singer  in  the  world,  they  consented,  and  withdrew 
from  the  stern  to  the  middle  of  the  vessel:  while  Arion  dressed 
himself  in  the  full  costume  of  his  calling,  took  his  lyre,  and 
standing  on  the  quarter-deck,  chanted  the  Orthian  [a  very  high 
pitched  lively  and  spirited  song].  His  strain  ended,  he  flung 
himself,  fully  attired  as  he  was,  headlong  into  the  sea.  The  Cor- 
inthians then  sailed  on  to  Corinth.  As  for  Arion,  a  dolphin,  they 
say,  took  him  upon  his  back  and  carried  him  to  Taenarum, 
where  he  went  ashore,  and  thence  proceeded  to  Corinth  in  his 
musician's  dress,  and  told  all  that  had  happened  to  him.  Peri- 
ander,  however,  disbelieved  the  story,  and  put  Arion  in  ward, 
to  prevent  his  leaving  Corinth,  while  he  watched  anxiously  for 
the  return  of  the  mariners.  On  their  arrival  he  summoned  them 
before  him  and  asked  them  if  they  could  give  him  any  tidings  of 
Arion.  They  returned  for  answer  that  he  was  alive  and  in  good 
health  in  Italy,  and  that  they  had  left  him  at  Tarentum,  where 
he  was  doing  well.  Thereupon  Arion  appeared  before  them, 
just  as  he  was  when  he  jumped  from  the  vessel :  the  men,  aston- 
ished and  detected  in  falsehood,  could  no  longer  deny  their 
guilt.  Such  is  the  account  which  the  Corinthians  and  Lesbians 
give;  and  there  is  to  this  day  at  Taenarum  an  ofFering  of  Arion's 
at  the  shrine,  which  is  a  small  figure  in  bronze,  representing  a 
man  seated  upon  a  dolphin."  {The  History  of  Herodotus,  Clio, 
1, 23-24.) 

Commenting  on  this  tale  the  poet  Bianor,  in  The  Gree\  An- 
thology {Declamatory  Epigrams,  308),  remarks,  "So  the  sea 
presumably  contains  fish  whose  righteousness  exceeds  that  of 

Coins  of  Methymna,  in  Lesbos,  Arion's  birthplace,  show  him 
riding  a  dolphin.  In  one  form  or  another  the  dolphin  is  repre- 


sented  on  the  coins  of  some  forty  Greek  cities,  and  doubtless 
most  Greeks  knew  the  reason  why. 

Phny  the  Elder,  in  his  Natural  History  (IX,  8,  24-28),  writes 
as  follows : 

"The  dolphin  is  an  animal  that  is  not  only  friendly  to  man- 
kind but  is  also  a  lover  of  music,  and  it  can  be  charmed  by  sing- 
ing in  harmony,  but  particularly  by  the  sound  of  the  water- 
organ.  It  is  not  afraid  of  a  human  being  as  something  strange 
to  it,  but  comes  to  meet  vessels  at  sea  and  sports  and  gambols 
round  them,  actually  trying  to  race  them  and  passing  them  even 
when  under  full  sail.  In  the  reign  of  the  late  lamented  Augustus 
a  dolphin  that  had  been  brought  into  the  Lucrine  Lake  fell 
marvellously  in  love  with  a  certain  boy,  a  poor  man's  son,  who 
used  to  go  from  the  Baiae  district  to  school  at  Pozzuoli,  because 
fairly  often  the  lad  when  loitering  about  the  place  at  noon  called 
him  to  him  by  the  name  of  Snubnose  and  coaxed  him  with  bits 
of  the  bread  he  had  with  him  for  the  journey, — I  should  be 
ashamed  to  tell  the  story  were  it  not  that  it  has  been  written 
about  by  Maecenas  and  Fabianus  and  Flavius  Alfius  and  many 
others, — and  when  the  boy  called  to  it  at  whatever  time  of  day, 
although  it  was  concealed  in  hiding,  it  used  to  fly  to  him  out  of 
the  depth,  eat  out  of  his  hand,  and  let  him  mount  on  its  back, 
sheathing  as  it  were  the  prickles  of  its  fin,  and  used  to  carry  him 
when  mounted  right  across  the  bay  to  Pozzuoli  to  school,  bring- 
ing him  back  in  similar  manner,  for  several  years,  until  the  boy 
died  of  disease,  and  then  it  used  to  keep  coming  sorrowfully 
and  like  a  mourner  to  the  customary  place,  and  itself  also  ex- 
pired, quite  undoubtedly  from  longing.  Another  dolphin  in 
recent  years  at  Hippo  Diarrhytus  on  the  coast  of  Africa  similarly 
used  to  feed  out  of  people's  hands  and  allow  itself  to  be  stroked, 
and  play  with  swimmers  and  carry  them  on  its  back.  The  Gov- 
ernor of  Africa,  Flavianus,  smeared  it  all  over  with  perfume, 
and  the  novelty  of  the  scent  apparently  put  it  to  sleep :  it  floated 
lifelessly  about,  holding  aloof  from  human  intercourse  for  some 


months  as  if  it  had  been  driven  away  by  insult;  but  afterwards 
it  returned  and  was  an  object  of  wonder  as  before.  The  expense 
caused  to  their  hosts  by  persons  of  official  position  who  came  to 
see  it  forced  the  people  of  Hippo  to  destroy  it.  Before  these  oc- 
currences a  similar  story  is  told  about  a  boy  in  the  city  of  lasus, 
with  whom  a  dolphin  was  observed  for  a  long  time  to  be  in  love, 
and  while  eagerly  following  him  to  the  shore  when  he  was  going 
away  it  grounded  on  the  sand  and  expired;  Alexander  the  Great 
made  the  boy  head  of  the  priesthood  of  Poseidon  at  Babylon, 
interpreting  the  dolphin's  affection  as  a  sign  of  the  deity's  favour. 
Hegesidemus  writes  that  in  the  same  city  of  lasus  another  boy 
also,  named  Hermias,  while  riding  across  the  sea  in  the  same 
manner  lost  his  life  in  die  waves  of  a  sudden  storm,  but  was 
brought  back  to  the  shore,  and  the  dolphin  confessing  itself  the 
cause  of  his  death  did  not  return  out  to  sea  and  expired  on  dry 
land.  Theophrastus  records  that  exactly  the  same  thing  occurred 
at  Naupactos  too.  Indeed  there  are  unlimited  instances :  the  peo- 
ple of  Amphilocus  and  Taranto  tell  the  same  stories  about  boys 
and  dolphins;  and  these  make  it  credible  that  also  the  skilled 
harper  Arion,  when  at  sea  the  sailors  were  getting  ready  to  kill 
him  with  the  intention  of  stealing  the  money  he  had  made,  suc- 
ceeded in  coaxing  them  to  let  him  first  play  a  turn  on  his  harp, 
and  the  music  attracted  a  school  of  dolphins,  whereupon  he 
dived  into  the  sea  and  was  taken  up  by  one  of  them  and  carried 
ashore  at  Cape  Matapan." 

A  very  similar  but  apparently  quite  independent  account  of 
these  stories  is  given  by  the  younger  Pliny,  in  his  Letters  (IX, 


The  elder  Pliny  then  goes  on  to  tell  of  the  manner  in  which 
dolphins  assist  fishermen,  which  corresponds  closely  with  the  ac- 
counts given  by  recent  observers  of  this  cooperative  activity  be- 
tween fishermen  and  dolphins.  (For  accounts  of  these  see 
Antony  Alpers,  Dolphins,  146  sq.) 

There  are  numerous  other  stories  similar  to  those  given  by  the 


Plinys  from  classical  antiquity,  but  it  is  quite  impossible  to  re- 
count them  here.'  What  they  all  have  in  common  is  the  friendli- 
ness of  the  dolphin  for  human  beings,  their  rescue  of  them  when 
they  were  thrown  into  the  sea,  their  playfulness,  especially  with 
children,  and  their  interest  in  almost  any  sort  of  sound.  All  these 
traits  came  to  be  regarded  as  mythical  by  later  and  more  sophis- 
ticated ages,  and  Usener  {Die  Sintfiuthsagen)  comments  on  the 
effect  that  the  prevalence  of  these  tales  had  even  upon  the  scien- 
tific thought  of  antiquity,  making  it  difficult  for  such  thinkers 
as  Aristotle  to  get  away  from  the  behef  in  the  dolphin's  ability 
to  carry  a  rider,  and  in  its  capacity  for  human  feeling  (Aristotle, 
History  of  Animals,  631a).  But  Aristotle  was  right  and  Herr 
Usener  wrong.  The  delightful  thing  about  most  of  these  myths 
is  that  they  all  appear  to  be  based  on  solid  fact,  and  not  on  the 
fancies  attributed  to  the  original  narrators.  Another  typical  mod- 
ern gloss  by  a  highly  sophisticated  writer,  biologically  not  un- 
knowledgeable,  Norman  Douglas,  is  the  following:  Comment- 
ing on  the  delphic  mythology,  he  writes,  "From  these  and  many 
other  sources,  we  may  gather  that  there  was  supposed  to  exist 
an  obscure  but  powerful  bond  of  affection  between  this  animal 
and  humanity,  and  that  it  was  endowed  with  a  certain  kind- 
heartedness  and  man-loving  propensity.  This  is  obviously  not 
the  case ;  the  dolphin  cares  no  more  about  us  than  cares  the  had- 
dock. What  is  the  origin  of  this  beHef  ?  I  conjecture  that  the 
beast  was  credited  with  these  social  sentiments  out  of  what  may 
be  called  poetic  reciprocation.  Mankind,  loving  the  merry  gam- 
bols  and  other  endearing  characteristics  of  the  dolphin,  which 

^  Among  the  many  well-known  figures  of  classical  mythology  said  to  have  been 
saved  by  dolphins  from  the  sea  are  Eikadios,  Enalos,  Koiranos,  Phalanthos,  Taras,  etc. 
In  many  other  cases  the  corpses  were  brought  ashore  by  a  dolphin,  which  then  expired 
on  reaching  land  (similarly,  with  minor  variations,  was  this  so  with  Palaimon  or 
Melikertes,  Dionysios  and  Hermias  of  lasos,  Hesiod,  and  the  boys  already  referred 
to  from  Baiae  and  Naupaktos).  Similar  incidents  reappear  in  the  writings  of  the  hagi- 
ographers.  Saints  Martinianos  of  Kaisareia,  Kallistratos  of  Carthage,  Basileios  the 
younger  of  Constantinople,  were  each  saved  from  a  watery  grave  by  a  couple  of  dol- 
phins. The  corpse  of  Saint  Loukianos  of  Antioch  was  brought  ashore  by  a  large 
dolphin,  which  then  expired  on  the  sand.  See  Klement,  Avion,  1-64,  and  Usener,  Die 
Sintfiuthsagen,  138-180. 


has  a  playful  trick  of  escorting  vessels  for  its  own  amusement, 
whose  presence  signified  fair  weather,  and  whose  parental  at- 
tachment to  its  offspring  won  their  esteem — quite  apart  from  its 
fabled,  perhaps  real,  love  of  music  or  at  least  of  noisy  sounds — 
were  pleased  to  invest  it  with  feelings  akin  to  their  own.  They 
were  fond  of  the  dolphin;  what  more  natural  and  becoming 
than  that  the  dolphin  should  be  fond  of  them?"  (Birds  and 
Beasts  of  the  Greeks  Anthology,  p.  i6i.) 

But  Douglas  was  undisillusionedly  wrong,  and  the  dolphins 
are  right,  and  so  is  the  "mankind"  that  believed  in  their  friend- 
liness. Though  pleased  to  see  the  dolphins  play,  it  is  to  be  re- 
gretted that  Douglas  did  not  mind  his  compass  and  his  way,  for: 

Had  the  curteous  Dolphins  heard 
One  note  of  his,  they  would  have  dar'd 
To  quit  the  waters,  to  enjoy 
In  banishment  such  melody. 

John  Hall,  1646. 

In  order  to  avoid  any  imputation  that  I  may  be  attempting  to 
play  Euhemerus"  to  the  dolphin's  tale,  the  facts  may  be  allowed 
to  speak  for  themselves — always  remembering  that  facts  never 
speak  for  themselves,  but  are  at  the  mercy  of  their  interpreters. 
All,  then,  that  I  am  concerned  to  show  here,  by  citing  the  con- 
temporary evidence,  is  that,  in  essence,  the  so-called  myths  of 
the  ancients  were  based  on  solid  facts  of  observation  and  not,  as 
has  hitherto  been  supposed,  on  the  imaginings  of  mythmakers. 

^Euhemerus  {circa  second  half  of  the  fourth  century  B.C.)  attempted  a  rationalistic 
explanation  of  the  mythology  prevailing  in  his  time.  The  theory  he  propounded,  in  his 
novel  of  travel,  Sacred  History,  was  simply  an  extension  of  the  current  skeptical-scien- 
tific attitude  to  matters  which  until  that  time  had  been  accepted  without  question. 
That  theory  was  that  the  gods  were  merely  men  who  because  of  their  great  exploits 
or  beneficence  had  been  accorded  divine  honors.  In  Crete,  coming  upon  the  remains 
of  a  tomb  bearing  the  name  of  Zeus,  Euhemerus  argued  that  even  Zeus  had  probably 
been  no  more  than  a  great  conqueror,  who  died  and  was  buried  in  Crete,  and  after- 
wards deified.  This  creditable  anthropological  attempt  to  historicize  mythology,  though 
it  failed  to  convince,  is  nevertheless  worthy  of  great  respect.  As  A.  B.  Cook  wrote,  if 
Euhemerus  said  that  Zeus  was  a  Cretan  king  when  he  ought  to  have  said  that  Cretan 
kings  played  the  part  of  Zeus,  it  is  a  pardonable  error.  (Zens,  I,  662.) 


Let  us  begin  with  a  brief  account  of  the  most  recent  and  most 
thoroughly  documented  story  of  a  free-dweUing  dolphin's  social 
interaction  with  human  beings.  This  is  the  story  of  Opo,  a  fe- 
male Tursiops  that  made  its  appearance  early  in  1955  at  Opononi, 
a  small  township  just  outside  the  mouth  of  Hokianga  Harbour, 
on  the  western  side  of  the  North  Island  of  New  Zealand.  From 
allowing  itself  at  first  to  be  rubbed  with  an  oar  or  mop  carried 
on  the  fishermen's  launches,  it  began  to  glide  in  near  the  beach 
among  the  bathers.  The  cheerful  putt-putt  of  a  motor-launch  or 
of  an  outboard  motor  was  an  irresistible  attraction  for  Opo,  and 
she  would  follow  the  boat  like  a  dog,  playing  or  cruising  round 
it.  If  she  had  an  urge  to  wander,  starting  up  the  motor  would 
invariably  draw  her  back  again.  Mr.  Piwai  Toi,  a  Maori  farmer, 
who  was  the  first  to  observe  Opo,  writes,  "She  was  really  and 
truly  a  children's  playmate.  Although  she  played  with  grown- 
ups she  was  really  at  her  charming  best  with  a  crowd  of  children 
swimming  and  wading.  I  have  seen  her  swimming  amongst 
children  almost  begging  to  be  petted.  She  had  an  uncanny  knack 
of  finding  out  those  who  were  gentle  among  her  young  ad- 
mirers, and  keeping  away  from  the  rougher  elements.  If  they 
were  all  gentle  then  she  would  give  of  her  best."  (Antony  Alpers, 
The  Dolphin,  pp.  228-229.) 

The  child  the  dolphin  favored  was  a  thirteen-year-old  girl 
named  Jill  Baker.  At  fourteen  Jill  wrote  the  following  account 
of  her  experience  with  Opo: 

"I  think  why  the  dolphin  became  so  friendly  with  me  was  be- 
cause I  was  always  gentle  with  her  and  never  rushed  at  her  as 
so  many  bathers  did.  No  matter  how  many  went  in  the  water 
playing  with  her,  as  soon  as  I  went  in  for  a  swim  she  would 
leave  all  the  others  and  go  off  side-by-side  with  me.  I  remember 
on  one  occasion  I  went  for  a  swim  much  further  up  the  beach 
than  where  she  was  playing,  and  I  was  only  in  the  water  a  short 
while  when  she  bobbed  up  just  in  front  of  my  face  and  gave  me 
such  a  fright.  On  several  other  occasions  when  I  was  standing 


in  the  water  with  my  legs  apart  she  would  go  between  them  and 
pick  me  up  and  carry  me  a  short  distance  before  dropping  me 
again.  At  first  she  didn't  like  the  feel  of  my  hands  and  would 
dart  away,  but  after  a  while  when  she  realized  I  would  not  harm 
her  she  would  come  up  to  me  to  be  rubbed  and  patted.  She 
would  quite  often  let  me  put  little  children  on  her  back  for  a 
moment  or  two."  (In  Antony  Alpers,  The  Dolphin,  p.  229.) 

Opo's  choice  of  the  gentle  Jill  Baker  for  the  rides  which  she 
gave  this  thirteen-year-old,  suggests  not  only  a  sensitive  discrimi- 
nation of  the  qualities  of  human  beings,  but  also  that  the  reports 
of  similar  incidents  which  have  come  down  to  us  from  antiquity 
were  based  on  similarly  observed  events.  The  one  element  in 
these  stories  which  seemed  most  difficult  to  accept,  and  which  is 
so  often  represented  in  ancient  art,  the  boy  riding  on  the  back  of 
a  dolphin,  is  now  removed  from  the  realm  of  fancy  and  placed 
squarely  in  the  realm  of  fact.  It  has  been  corroborated  and  sus- 

Mr.  Antony  Alpers  in  his  book  on  the  dolphin,  and  especially 
that  part  devoted  to  the  eyewitness  accounts  of  Opo's  behavior, 
goes  far  toward  establishing  the  fact  of  the  dolphin's  remarkable 
capacity  for  rapport  with  human  beings.  But  for  those  striking 
facts  I  must  recommend  you  to  Mr.  Alper's  charming  book. 

The  dolphin's  extraordinary  interest  in  and,  what  we  will  I 
am  sure  not  be  far  wrong  in  interpreting  as,  concern  for  human 
beings,  is  dramatically  told  by  George  Llano  in  his  report  Air- 
men Against  the  Sea.  This  report,  written  on  survival  at  sea  dur- 
ing the  Second  World  War,  records  the  experience  of  six  Ameri- 
can airmen,  shot  down  over  the  Pacific,  who  found  themselves 
in  a  seven-man  raft  being  pushed  by  a  porpoise  toward  land.  Un- 
fortunately the  land  was  an  island  held  by  the  Japanese.  The 
friendly  porpoise  must  have  been  surprised  and  hurt  when  he 
found  himself  being  dissuaded  from  his  pushing  by  being  beaten 
of?  with  the  oars  of  the  airmen. 

Dr.  Llano  also  reports  that  "Most  observers  noted  that  when 


porpoises  appeared  sharks  disappeared,  and  they  frequently  re- 
fer to  the  'welcome'  appearance  of  porpoises,  whose  company 
they  preferred  to  that  of  sharks."  This  confirms  all  earlier  reports 
that  sharks  are  no  match  for  the  dolphin  kind. 

Dolphins  have  been  known  to  push  a  mattress  quite  empty 
of  human  beings  for  considerable  distances  at  sea.  Possibly  it  is 
merely  the  pushing  that  interests  them,  and  not  the  saving  of 
any  human  beings  that  might  be  atop  of  them. 

Is  there  any  evidence  that  dolphins  save  drowning  swimmers  ? 
There  is. 

In  1945  the  wife  of  a  well-known  trial  attorney  residing  in 
Florida  was  saved  from  drowning  by  a  dolphin.'  This  woman 
had  stepped  into  a  sea  with  a  strong  undertow  and  was  immedi- 
ately dragged  under.  Just  before  losing  consciousness,  she  re- 
members hoping  that  someone  would  push  her  ashore.  "With 
that,  someone  gave  me  a  tremendous  shove,  and  I  landed  on 
the  beach,  face  down,  too  exhausted  to  turn  over  . . .  when  I  did, 
no  one  was  near,  but  in  the  water  almost  eighteen  feet  out  a  por- 
poise was  leaping  around,  and  a  few  feet  beyond  him  another 
large  fish  was  also  leaping." 

In  this  case  the  porpoise  was  almost  certainly  a  dolphin  and 
the  large  fish  a  fishtail  shark.  A  man  who  had  observed  the 
events  from  the  other  side  of  a  fence  told  the  rescued  woman 
that  this  was  the  second  time  he  had  seen  a  drowning  person 
saved  by  a  "porpoise." 

More  recently,  on  the  night  of  February  29,  i960,  Mrs.  Yvonne 
M.  Bliss  of  Stuart  fell  from  a  boat  off  the  east  coast  of  Grand 
Bahama  Island  in  the  West  Indies.'  "After  floating,  swimming, 
shedding  more  clothing  for  what  seemed  an  eternity,  I  saw  a 
form  in  the  water  to  the  left  of  me.  ...  It  touched  the  side  of 
my  hip  and,  thinking  it  must  be  a  shark,  I  moved  over  to  the 
right  to  try  to  get  away  from  it This  change  in  my  position 

^  "Saved  by  a  Porpoise,"  Nattiral  History,  LVIII  (1949),  385-386. 

*  Winthrop  N.  Kellogg,  Porpoises  and  Sonar,  University  of  Chicago  Press,  1962,  p.  14. 


was  to  my  advantage  as  heretofore  I  was  bucking  a  cross  tide 
and  the  waves  would  wash  over  my  head  and  I  would  swallow 
a  great  deal  of  water.  This  sea  animal  which  I  knew  by  this  time 
must  be  a  porpoise  had  guided  me  so  that  I  was  being  carried 
with  the  tide. 

"After  another  eternity  and  being  thankful  that  my  friend 
was  keeping  away  the  sharks  and  barracuda  for  which  these 
waters  are  famous,  the  porpoise  moved  back  of  me  and  came 
around  to  my  right  side.  I  moved  over  to  give  room  to  my  com- 
panion and  later  knew  that  had  not  the  porpoise  done  this,  I 
would  have  been  going  downstream  to  deeper  and  faster  mov- 
ing waters.  The  porpoise  had  guided  me  to  the  section  where 
the  water  was  the  most  shallow. 

"Shortly  I  touched  what  felt  hke  fish  netting  to  my  feet.  It 
was  seaweed  and  under  that  the  glorious  and  most  welcome 

"As  I  turned  toward  shore,  stumbling,  losing  balance,  and 
saying  a  prayer  of  thanks,  my  rescuer  took  off  like  a  streak  on 
down  the  channel." 

The  reader  must  be  left  to  make  what  he  can  of  such  occur- 
rences. Dr.  George  G.  Goodwin  of  the  American  Museum  of 
Natural  History  doubts  the  intention  of  dolphins  to  save  drown- 
ing persons.'  "Anything  floating,"  he  writes,  "on  or  near  the 
surface  of  the  sea  will  attract  his  attention.  His  first  action  on 
approaching  the  object  of  his  curiosity  is  to  roll  under  it.  In 
doing  so,  something  partly  submerged,  like  the  body  of  a  drown- 
ing person,  is  nudged  to  the  surface  of  the  water.  The  sea  does 
its  part  and  automatically  drives  floating  objects  toward  the 
beach."  This  may  well  be  so  in  some  cases,  but  it  is  an  explana- 
tion which  does  not  fit  the  incidents  described  by  Mrs.  Bhss,  in 
which  she  was  not  pushed  but  guided.  Occam's  razor  should 
not  be  too  bluntly  applied. 

^George  G.  Goodwin,  "Porpoise — Friend  of  Man?"  Natural  History,  LVI  (1947), 

The  cooperativeness  of  dolphins  with  fishermen  in  various 
parts  of  the  world  has  gone  on  for  several  thousand  years  with- 
out its  significance  having  registered  much  upon  the  conscious- 
ness of  the  rest  of  the  world — including  the  learned  and  the 

In  the  Mediterranean  from  the  earliest  days,  as  recorded  by 
Aelian  in  his  On  the  Characteristics  of  Animals,  VI,  15,  to  the 
present  day,  torchlight  fishing  with  the  aid  of  dolphins  has  been 
a  traditional  way  of  fishing.  This  has  been  described  by  Nicholas 
Apostolides  in  his  book  La  Peche  en  Grece,  who  tells  how  fisher- 
men of  the  Sporades  catch  their  garfish  "in  the  darkest  nights  of 
the  month  of  October"  by  methods  very  similar  to  those  de- 
scribed by  Aelian.  Briefly,  the  fish  attracted  by  the  fishermen's 
flares  begin  to  collect,  whereupon  the  dolphins  appear  and  drive 
them  into  the  fishermen's  nets. 

Similar  methods  of  fishing  were  practiced  in  the  Antipodes, 
off  the  New  Zealand  and  Queensland  coasts.  The  aborigines  of 
Moreton  Bay,  Queensland,  used  to  catch  mullet  with  the  aid  of 
dolphins,  at  a  place  appropriately  enough  called  Amity  Point. 
The  aborigines  recognized  individual  dolphins  and  called  them 
by  name.  With  their  nets  ready  on  the  beach  the  aborigines 
waited  for  a  shoal  of  fish  to  appear,  whereupon  they  would  run 
down  and  make  a  peculiar  splashing  in  the  water  with  their 
spears,  and  the  dolphins  on  the  outside  of  the  shoal  would  drive 
the  fish  towards  the  nets  for  the  aborigines  to  catch.  Fairholme, 
who  described  these  events  in  1856,  writes,  "For  my  part  I  can- 
not doubt  that  the  understanding  is  real,  and  that  the  natives 
know  these  porpoises  [actually  the  dolphin  Tursiops  catalania], 
and  that  strange  porpoises  would  not  show  so  little  fear  of  the 
natives.  The  oldest  men  of  the  tribe  say  that  the  same  kind  of 
fishing  has  always  been  carried  on  as  long  as  they  can  remember. 
Porpoises  abound  in  the  bay,  but  in  no  other  part  do  the  natives 
fish  with  their  assistance." 

The  Irrawaddy  River  dolphin  is  also  an  assistant-fisherman. 


John  Anderson  reports  that  "The  fishermen  beheve  that  the  dol- 
phin purposely  draws  fish  to  their  nets,  and  each  fishing  village 
has  its  particular  guardian  dolphin  which  receives  a  name  com- 
mon to  all  the  fellows  of  his  school;  and  it  is  this  superstition 
which  makes  it  so  difficult  to  obtain  specimens  of  this  Cetacean. 
Colonel  Sladen  has  told  me  that  suits  are  not  infrequently 
brought  into  the  native  courts  to  recover  a  share  in  the  capture 
of  fish,  in  which  a  plaintiff's  dolphin  has  been  held  to  fill  the  nets 
of  rival  fishermen."  (John  Anderson,  Account  of  the  Zoological 
Results  of  Two  Expeditions  to  Western  Yunnan.) 

The  Pink-Bellied  river  dolphin  {hiia  geoffrensis)  of  the  Trap- 
ajos,  a  tributary  of  the  Amazon,  also  helps  its  human  friends  with 
fishing.  Dr.  F.  Bruce  LamK  says  that  this  dolphin,  locally  known 
as  the  boto,  "is  reported  to  have  saved  the  lives  of  helpless  persons 
whose  boats  have  capsized,  by  pushing  them  ashore.  None  of 
the  dreaded  flesh-eating  piranhas  appear  when  a  porpoise  is 
present,  for  they  themselves  would  be  eaten."  And  he  goes  on 
to  give  an  eye-witness  account  of  fishing  with  the  aid  of  a  trained 
dolphin.  "My  curiosity  was  aroused,"  he  writes,  "by  the  paddler, 
who  began  tapping  on  the  side  of  the  canoe  with  his  paddle 
between  strokes  and  whistling  a  peculiar  call.  Asking  Rymundo 
about  this,  he  startled  me  by  casually  remarking  diat  they  were 
calling  their  boto,  their  porpoise As  we  approached  the  fish- 
ing grounds  near  the  riverbank,  Rymundo  lit  his  carbide  miner's 
lamp,  adjusted  the  reflector,  chose  his  first  harpoon,  and  stood  up 
in  the  bow  ready  for  action.  Almost  immediately  on  the  offshore 
side  of  the  canoe  about  50  feet  from  us  we  heard  a  porpoise  come 
up  to  blow  and  take  in  fresh  air."  The  porpoise  then  chased  the 
fish  toward  the  canoe  and  Rymundo  harpooned  them  with  ease. 

Many  ancient  writers  have  referred  to  the  brilliancy  of  the 
changeful  colors  when  the  dolphin  is  dying.  Byron  makes  refer- 
ence to  this  in  "Childe  Harold's  Pilgrimage," 

"F.  Bruce  Lamb,  "The  Fisherman's  Porpoise,"  Natural  History,  LXIII  (1954),  231-2. 


"Parting  day 
Dies  like  tlie  dolpiiin,  whom  each  pang  imbues 
With  a  new  colour  as  it  gasps  away; 
The  last  still  loveliest,  till  'tis  gone,  and 

all  is  gray." 

Here  is  a  peculiar  confusion,  for  this  is  not  the  mammaHan 
dolphin  of  which  we  have  been  speaking,  but  the  swift  piscivor- 
ous oceanic  fish  Coryphaena  hippurus,  the  dolphin  of  sailors.  It 
is  blue  with  deeper  spots,  and  gleaming  with  gold.  It  is,  indeed, 
famous  for  the  beauty  of  its  changing  colors  when  dying.  The 
mammalian  dolphin  exhibits  no  such  spectacular  color  changes 
when  dying. 

Happily,  it  is  not  with  dying  dolphins  or  with  their  changing 
colors  that  we  are  concerned  here,  but  rather  with  ours,  the 
changing  color  of  the  complexion  of  our  once  too  sophisticated 
beliefs.  Beliefs  which,  in  their  own  way,  were  very  much  more 
in  the  nature  of  myths  than  the  ancient  ones  which  we  wrote 
off  a  little  too  disdainfully  as  such.  The  history  of  the  dolphin 
constitutes  an  illuminating  example  of  the  eclipse  of  knowledge 
once  possessed  by  the  learned,  but  which  was  virtually  com- 
pletely relegated  to  the  outermost  fringes  of  mythology  during 
the  last  eighteen  hundred  years.  Perhaps  there  is  a  moral  to  be 
drawn  here.  If  so,  I  shall  leave  it  to  others  to  draw.  But  now 
that  scientific  interest  in  the  dolphin  has  been  aroused  we  are 
entering  into  a  new  era  of  delphinology,  and  wdth  the  confirma- 
tion of  so  many  of  the  observations  of  the  ancients  already  made, 
we  may  look  forward  with  confidence  to  others.  Dolphins  have 
large  brains;  possibly  they  will  some  day  be  able  to  teach  us 
what  brains  are  really  for. 


Appendix  A 

A  Note  for  Bibliophiles 

It  was  an  ancient  belief,  as  Camerarius  tells  us,  that  "when  tempests 
arise,  and  seamen  cast  their  anchor,  the  dolphin,  from  its  love  to  man, 
twines  itself  round  it,  so  that  it  may  more  safely  lay  hold  of  the 
ground."  I  know  of  no  verifying  evidence  for  this  statement,  but 
should  not  be  surprised  to  find  some  element  of  truth  in  it.  The 
dolphin  twined  about  an  anchor  is  the  device  which  Aldus  Manutius 
(1450-15 1 5)  adopted  for  his  Aldine  Press,  which  began  pubUcation 
in  1494.  This  device  was  later  adapted  to  his  own  use  by  the  English 
publisher  William  Pickering  (1796-1854). 

The  representation  of  the  dolphin  twined  about  the  anchor  refers 
to  no  maritime  supremacy  of  that  creature,  but  rather  to  its  kindly 
regard  for  man.  The  following  poem  in  George  Wither's  A  Collec- 
tion of  Emblemes  (1635),  throws  some  additional  light  on  the  mean- 
ing of  the  emblem. 

If  Safely,  thou  desire  to  goe. 
Bee  nor  too  Swift,  nor  overslow. 
[Dolphin  and  Anchor] 
Illvstr.  X.    Book  2. 

Our  Elders,  when  their  meaning  was  to  shew 
A  native-speedinesse  (in  Emblem  wise) 
The  picture  of  a  Dolphin-Fish  they  drew; 

Which,  through  the  waters,  with  great  swiftnesse,  flies. 

An  Anchor,  they  did  figure,  to  declare 

Hope,  stayednesse,  or  a  grave-deliberation : 

And  therefore  when  those  two,  united  are. 

Its  giveth  us  a  two-fold  Intimation. 

For,  as  the  Dolphin  putteth  us  in  minde. 

That  in  the  Courses,  which  we  have  to  make, 


Wee  should  not  be,  to  slothfulnesse  enclin'd; 

But,  swift  to  follow  what  we  undertake: 

So,  by  an  Anchor  added  thereunto, 

Inform'd  wee  are,  that,  to  maintaine  our  speed, 

Hope,  must  bee  joyn'd  therewith  (in  all  we  doe) 

If  wee  will  undiscouraged  proceed. 

It  sheweth  (also)  that,  our  speedinesse, 

Must  have  some  staydnesse;  lest,  when  wee  suppose 

To  prosecute  our  aymes  with  good  successe. 

Wee  may,  by  Rashnesse,  good  endeavors  lose. 

They  worke,  with  most  securitie,  that  know 
The  Times,  and  best  Occasions  of  delay; 
When,  likewise,  to  be  neither  swift,  nor  slow; 
And,  when  to  practise  all  the  speed,  they  may. 
For,  whether  calme,  or  stormie-passages, 
(Through  this  life's  Ocean)  shall  their  Bark  attend; 
This  double  Vertue,  will  procure  their  ease: 
And,  them,  in  all  necessities,  befriend. 

By  Speedinesse,  our  works  are  timely  wrought; 

By  Staydnesse,  they,  to  passe  are,  safely,  brought. 

From  A  Collection  of  Emblemes,  Ancient  and  Moderne, 
by  George  Wither.  London,  1635.  Book  2,  p.  72. 


Appendix  B 

Dolphins  and  Their  Distribution 

Order:  CETACEA 
Suborder:  ODONTOCETI 
Family:  Delphinidae 
Subfamily:  Delphininae 
Genus:  Delphintis 
Subfamily :  Delphinapterinae 
Genus :  Monodon 
Genus:  Delphinapterus 

The  Suborder  Odontoceti  of  the  Order  Cetacea  consists  of  the 
toothed  whales,  in  contrast  to  the  toothless  whalebone  or  baleen 
whales,  the  Mystacoceti.  The  whales  are  large  dolphins  or  one  may 
say  that  dolphins  are  small  whales.  The  members  of  the  Odontoceti 
are  the  Dolphin,  Freshwater  Dolphin,  Porpoise,  Sperm  Whale  or 
Cachalot,  Lesser  Sperm  Whale,  Bottle-Nose  Whale,  Narwhal  or 
Sea-Unicorn,  White  Whale,  Pilot  Whale  or  Black-Fish,  Killer  Whale 
or  Grampus. 

Delphinus  delphis:  The  Common  Dolphin.  It  is  easily  recognized 
by  its  well-defined  narrow  beak  and  distinctive  coloration,  being 
darker  above  than  below.  There  is  a  narrow  beak,  which  is  sharply 
marked  off  from  the  low  recHning  forehead  by  a  V-shaped  groove.  A 
length  of  up  to  8/4  feet  has  been  recorded.  Range  of  distribution  is 
very  wide.  May  be  met  in  any  temperate  or  warm  sea  throughout 
the  world,  and  occurs  at  times  in  vast  schools. 

Delphinus  roseiventris:  The  Red-Bellied  Dolphin.  Moluccas  and 
Torres  Straits,  Australia;  3  feet  10  inches. 

Prodelphinus  attenuatus:  Tropical  and  sub-tropical  parts  of  Atlan- 
tic Ocean;  6 feet. 

P.  plagiodon:  Atlantic  coast  of  North  America  from  Cape  Hat- 
teras,  Gulf  of  Mexico;  7  feet. 


p.  jroenatus:  The  Bridled  Dolphin.  Atlantic  and  Indian  Oceans; 
about  6  feet. 

P.  malayanus:  East  Indies;  more  than  6  feet. 

P.  coeruleoalbus:  South  America,  near  mouth  of  River  Plate;  about 
4  feet. 

P.  euphrosyne:  Atlantic  Ocean  to  South  Africa;  about  8  feet. 
Genus  Tursiops 

T.  truncatus:  The  Bottle-Nosed  Dolphin.  Has  a  short  well-defined 
snout  2  or  3  inches  long.  There  is  a  prominent  fin  in  the  middle  of 
the  back.  Reaches  a  length  of  ii  to  12  feet.  Has  a  very  wide  range. 
Commonest  along  the  Atlantic  coast  of  America  from  Maine  to 
Florida.  Found  in  Bay  of  Biscay,  in  the  Mediterranean  Sea,  and  in 
New  Zealand  waters. 

T.  ahusalam :  Red  Sea;  6  feet. 

T.  catalania:  Indian  and  Australian  seas. 
Genus  Steno 

S.  rostratus:  The  Rough-Toothed  Dolphin.  Long-beaked,  wdth 
roughened  or  furrowed  teeth.  Atlantic  and  Indian  Oceans;  about  8 

Genus  Orcaella 

O.  brevirostris:  Irrawaddy  River  Dolphin.  From  Bay  of  Bengal, 
Vizagapatam,  Singapore,  and  Siam  (i.e.,  S.E.  Asia). 
Genus  Lissodelphis  or  Tursio 

Lissodelphis:  The  Right  Whale  Dolphin.  All  oceans. 
Genus  Grampus 

G.  griseus:  Risso's  Dolphin.  North  Atlantic,  Mediterranean,  New 
Zealand,  and  Cape  of  Good  Hope;  12  to  13  feet. 
Genus  Cephalorhynchus 

These  are  the  Southern,  mostly  cold-water  dolphins. 

C.  heavisidei:  Heaviside's  Dolphin.  Cape  of  Good  Hope;  about  4 

C.  hectori:  Hector's  Dolphin.  New  Zealand;  about  6  feet. 

C.  albiventris:  White-Bellied  Dolphin.  A  very  rare  form,  found  off 
the  coast  of  South  America;  about  4  feet  6  inches. 

C  commersonii:  Commerson's  Dolphin;  also  known  as  the  Piebald 
Porpoise  or  Le  Jacobite.  Southern  oceans;  up  to  5V4  feet. 


Genus  Lagenorhynchus 

Characterized  by  great  number  of  vertebrae  (80  to  90),  great  length 
o£  transverse  and  vertical  bony  processes  from  vertebrae,  moderately 
pointed  high  back  fin  having  concave  posterior  border;  the  beak  is 

L.  acutiis:  The  White-Sided  Dolphin.  North  Atlantic;  about  9 

L.  aitstralis:  Peale's  Porpoise.  Cape  Horn,  Chile,  Patagonia,  Falk- 
land Islands;  over  7  feet. 

L.  albirostris:  The  White-Beaked  Dolphin,  North  Atlantic;  9  to  10 

L.  cruciger:  South  Pacific;  5  to  6  feet. 

L.  fitzroyi:  Fitzroy's  Dolphin.  Southern  end  of  South  America;  5 
feet  4  inches. 

L.  obscitrus:  Dusky  Dolphin.  South  Africa,  New  Zealand,  Falk- 
land Islands;  7  feet. 

Genus  Sotalia 

Concentrated  in  the  tropical  seas  or  rivers  of  South  America,  Africa, 
India,  and  the  Far  East. 

S.  pallida:  Buffeo  bianco.  Upper  Amazon;  5  feet  6  inches. 

S.  fluviatalis:  Buffeo  negro.  Upper  Amazon;  3  feet  7  inches. 

S.  tucuxi:  Upper  Amazon. 

S.  guianensis:  N.  E.  coast  of  South  America. 

S.  teuszii:  Noteworthy  as  being  the  one  Cetacean  believed  to  feed 
exclusively  on  vegetable  matter.  Kamerun  River. 

S.  gadamn:  Vizagapatam;  averages  7  feet;  snout  6  inches. 

S.  lentiginosa:  Vizagapatam. 

S.  plmnbea:  Malabar  coast  of  India;  about  8  feet;  very  long  snout. 

S.  borneensis:  Gulf  of  Siam  to  Sarawak  in  Borneo. 

S.  sinensis:  Chinese  White  Dolphin. 

The  Fresh  Water  Dolphins. 

Genus  Platanista 
P.  gangetica:  The  Susu  or  Gangetic  Dolphin;  about  8  feet;  snout 
and  beak  drawn  into  long  forceps-like  beak,  7  or  8  inches  long;  con- 
fined to  River  Ganges  and  River  Indus.  It  is  almost  blind. 


Genus  7/2 /a 
7.  geoffrensis:  Amazonian  Dolphin  or  Boutu.  Upper  Amazon;  7 
feet;  long  beak. 

Genus  Pontoporia 
P.  blainvillei:  La  Plata  Dolphin.  Estuary  of  Rio  de  la  Plata;  about 
5  feet. 

Genus  Lipotes 
L.  vexillifer:  Chinese  River  Dolphin.  Ting  Ling  Lake,  600  miles 
up  the  Yang-tse  River;  7  feet  6  inches;  slightly  upcurved  jaws. 

The  Porpoise 

The  small  beakless  Delphinidae,  which  have  a  triangular  dorsal 
fin  and  spade-shaped  teeth,  black  above  and  white  below;  travels  in 
large  schools.  The  word  "porpoise"  is  derived  from  the  French  porc- 
poisson,  "pig-fish."  Never  larger  than  6  feet. 
Genus  Phocaena 

P.  phocaena:  The  Common  Porpoise.  Chiefly  North  Atlantic  and 
North  Pacific;  never  larger  than  6  feet. 

P.  spinipinnis:  Burmeister's  Porpoise.  Rare.  La  Plata  round  Horn 
to  Peru. 

P.  dalli:  Dall's  Harbor  Porpoise.  Very  rare.  Alaska;  less  than  5 

P.  truei:  True's  Porpoise.  Japan;  less  than  5  feet. 

P.  dioprica:  River  Plate  to  South  Georgia. 
Genus  Neomeris 

N.  phocaenoides:  Finless  Black  Porpoise.  Cape  of  Good  Hope  to 

Genus  Lissodelphis 

L.  peronii:  New  Zealand  and  Tasmania;  about  6  feet. 

L.  brealis:  North  Pacific;  about  8  feet. 

The  Right  Whale  Dolphins 

The  Whales  with  Teeth 

The  toothed  whales  are  big  dolphins,  and  are  on  the  average  much 
smaller  than  the  Whalebone  or  Baleen  toothless  Whales. 

Family  Physeteridae 

Subfamily  Physeterinae 


Genus  Physeter 

P.  catodon :  The  Sperm  Whale  or  Cachalot.  All  oceans.  Male  may 
reach  60  feet,  the  female  usually  half  the  length  of  the  male.  This  is 
the  whale  that  has  suffered  the  relentless  persecution  of  whalers, 
always  a  coveted  prize  on  account  of  its  spermaceti-permeated  blub- 
ber, and  its  excretory  ambergris.  The  most  dangerous  of  whales. 

Subfamily  Kogiinae 
Genus  Kogia 

K.  breviceps:  The  Pigmy  or  Lesser  Sperm  Whale.  Atlantic,  Pa- 
cific, Indian,  and  Antarctic  oceans;  about  10  feet. 

Family  Ziphiidae 

Genus:  Hyperoodon  rostratus:  The  Bottle-Nose  Whale.  North 
Atlantic,  Mediterranean,  South  Pacific,  and  Antarctic;  20  to  30  feet. 

Genus:  Mesoplodon:  "The  Cow  Fish;"  Atlantic,  Pacific,  and  In- 
dian oceans. 

Genus :  Ziphiiis:  The  Two-Toothed  Whale.  All  oceans. 

Genus:  Tasmacetus:  South  Pacific. 

Genus:  Berardius:  Pacific. 

Family  Monodontidae  or  Delphinapteridae 

Subfamily  Delphinapterinae 

Genus:  Monodon  monocerus:  Narwhal  or  Sea  Unicorn.  Arctic 
seas  south  of  the  ice-field.  The  male  is  characterized  by  an  immense 
tusk,  sometimes  9  feet  long,  projecting  like  a  spear  from  the  left 
side  of  the  bluntly-rounded  muzzle.  The  tusk  is  spirally  grooved,  and 
is  the  source  of  the  horn  of  the  unicorn  of  heraldry.  Mottled  in  color, 
and  about  18  feet  long. 

Genus:  Delphinapterus  leucas:  The  White  Whale  or  Beluga.  Re- 
sembles the  Narwhal  in  size,  shape,  and  habitat,  but  the  tusk  is 

Family  Delphinidae 
Genus  Globiocephala 

G.  melas:  Pilot  Whale  or  Black-Fish  or  Ca'ing  Whale.  Temperate 
or  tropical  seas.  Rounded  head  with  dorsal  fin.  Takes  its  name  from 
the  fact  that  one  whale  or  pilot  leads  the  way  of  the  sometimes  huge 
schools;  about  25  feet. 


Genus  Orcintis 

O.  orca:  Killer  Whale  or  Grampus.  All  seas.  With  a  high  dorsal 
fin  and  black  and  white  coloring,  aggressively  bold  and  carnivorous, 
with  singular  cunning  and  intelligence.  Fourteen  seals  and  thirteen 
porpoises  have  been  found  in  the  stomach  of  a  male  measuring  21 
feet.  The  male  is  usually  about  30  feet  in  length. 

Genus  Pseudorca 

P.  crassidens:  The  False  Killer  Whale  or  Lesser  Killer  Whale.  All 


Aelian.  On  the  Characteristics  of  Animals.  Bk.  VI,  15. 

Aesop.  Fables.  "The  Monkey  and  the  Dolphin." 

Alpers,  Antony.  Dolphins:  the  Myth  and  the  Mammal.  Boston: 
Houghton  Mifflin,  1961. 

Anderson,  John.  Anatomical  and  Zoological  Researches:  Comprising 
an  Account  of  the  Zoological  Results  of  the  Two  Expeditions  to 
Western  Yunnan.  London:  Bernard  Quaritch,  1878. 

Apollodorus.  The  Library.  Ill,  5,  3. 

Apostolides,  Nicholas.  La  Peche  en  Grece.  Athens,  1907. 

Aristotle.  History  of  Animals.  Bk.  I,  5;  II,  i,  13,  15;  III,  i,  7,  20;  IV, 
8-10;  V,  5;  VI,  12;  VIII,  2, 13;  IX,  48. 

Biedermann,  Paul.  Der  Delphin  in  der  dichtenden  iind  bildenden 
Phantasie  der  Griechen  iind  Roemer.  Halle,  1881. 

Cook,  Arthur  B.  Zeus:  A  Study  in  Ancient  Religion.  Cambridge, 
Eng.':  The  University  Press,  1914,  vol.  i,  p.  662. 

Douglas,  Norman.  Birds  and  Beasts  of  the  Gree\  Anthology.  Lon- 
don :  Chapman  and  Hall,  1928,  p.  161. 

Euhemerus.  Sacred  History. 

Fairholme,  J.  K.  E.  "The  Blacks  of  Moreton  Bay,  and  the  Porpoises," 
Proceedings  of  the  Zoological  Society  of  London,  XXIV  (1856), 

Goodwin,  George  G.  "Porpoise — Friend  of  Man?"  Natural  History, 

LVI  (1947),  337. 

The  Gree\  Anthology. 

Herodotos.  History.  Clio  I,  23-24. 


Hill,  Ralph  N.  Window  in  the  Sea.  New  York:  Rinehart,  1956. 
Kellogg,  Winthrop  N,  Porpoises  and  Sonar.  Chicago:  University  of 

Chicago  Press,  1961. 
Klement,  Carl.  Arion.  Vienna,  1898. 
Lamb,   F.   Bruce.   "The  Fisherman's  Porpoise,"  Natural  History, 

LXIII  (1954),  231-232. 
Llano,  George  A.  Airmen  Against  the  Sea.  Maxwell  Air  Force  Base, 

Alabama;   Arctic,  Desert,  Tropic  Information   Center   [1955  or 

1956],  p. 74. 
Longman,   Heber.   "New   Records   of   Cetacea,"   Memoirs   of  the 

Queensland  Museum,  VIII  (1926),  266-278. 
Longus,  Cornificius.  De  Etymis  Deorum. 
Lucian.  Marine  Dialogues.  8. 
Lycophron.  Alexandra. 

Nonnus  Panopolitanus.  Dionysiaca.  VI,  265-266. 
Norman,  John  R.,  and  Fraser,  F.  C.  Giant  Fishes,   Whales,  and 

Dolphins.  London:  Putnam,  1937. 
Oppian.  Halieutica.  I,  649-654, 1089;  V,  422,  519^ 
Ovid.  Metamorphoses.  Ill,  i,  202. 
Pliny  the  Elder.  Natural  History.  IX,  8, 24-28. 
Pliny  the  Younger.  Letters.  IX,  23. 
Plutarch.  On  the  Cleverness  of  Animals. 
Porphyry.  De  Abstinentia.  Ill,  16. 
Rabinovitch,  Melitta.  Der  Delphin  in  Sage  und  Mythos  der  Griechen. 

Dornach:  Hybernia-Verlag,  1947. 
"Saved  by  a  Porpoise,"  Natural  History,  LVIII  (1949),  385-386. 
Schmidt,  Bernhard.  Das  Volf{sleben  der  Neugriechen.  Leipzig,  1871. 
Servius.  Commentarii  in  Vergilii  Aeneidos.  Ill,  332. 
Stebbins,  Eunice  B.  The  Dolphin  in  the  Literature  and  Art  of  Greece 

and  Rome.  Menasha,  Wisconsin :  Banta  Publishing  Co.,  1929. 
Usener,  Hermann.  Die  Sintfluthsagen.  Bonn:  F.  Cohen,  1899. 
Xenophon.  Anabasis.  V,  4, 28. 

Modern  Whales^  Dolphins^ 
and  Porpoises^  as  Challenges 
to  Our  Intelligence 



JLhe  intelligence  of  whales  has  been  the  subject 
of  speculation  by  writers  since  Ancient  Greece/  '  The  discovery 
of  the  large  brains  of  the  Cetacea  in  the  eighteenth  century  led 
to  inevitable  comparisons  of  these  brains  to  those  of  the  humans 
and  of  the  lower  primates.  The  winds  of  scholarly  opinions 
concerning  the  whales  have  anciently  blown  strongly  for  high 
inteUigence  but  during  later  centuries  shifted  strongly  against 
high  intelligence.  At  the  time  of  Aristotle  (384-322  B.C.)  the 
dolphin,  for  example,  was  held  in  high  esteem,  and  many  stories 
of  the  apparently  great  abilities  of  these  animals  were  current.'' 
By  the  time  of  Plinius  Secundus  (A.D.  23-79)  the  beginning  of 
a  note  of  skepticism  was  introduced.  Plinius  said,  "I  should  be 
ashamed  to  tell  the  story  were  it  not  that  it  has  been  written 
about  by  . . .  others.'" 

In  the  middle  ages  the  strong  influence  of  religious  philosophy 
on  thinking  placed  Man  in  a  completely  separate  compartment 
from  all  other  living  creatures,  and  the  accurate  anatomy  of  the 


whales  was  neglected.  This  point  is  illustrated  by  Figure  i,  pub- 
lished in  the  1500's  in  Historia  Animalium  by  Konrad  Gesner. 
This  was  apparently  a  baleen  whale.  It  has  two  tubes  which  ap- 
parently symbolize  the  double  blowhole  of  the  Mystacocetae. 
There  is  no  modern  whale  known  that  has  such  tubes  sticking 
out  of  the  top  of  his  head.  There  is  a  huge  eye  above  the  angle 
of  the  jaw.  All  whales  have  the  eye  at  or  near  the  posterior  angle 
of  the  jaw.  The  eye  is  very  much  smaller  than  the  one  shown 
here.  A  print  published  in  1598  of  the  anatomy  of  these  animals 
is  shown  in  Figure  2.  The  drawing  of  the  male  organ  is  accurate 
(apparently  it  was  measured  with  a  walking  stick),  but  the  eye 
is  too  large  and  is  misplaced. 

These  pictures  illustrate  very  well  man's  most  common  rela- 
tionship to  the  whale,  which  has  continued  to  the  present  day. 
For  commercial  reasons  man  continues  to  exploit  these  creatures' 

It  was  not  until  the  anatomical  work  of  Vesalius  and  others 
that  the  biological  similarities  and  differences  of  man  and  other 
mammals  were  pointed  out.  It  was  at  this  time  that  the  investi- 
gation of  man's  large  and  complex  brain  began. 

All  through  these  periods  intelligence  and  the  biological  brain 
factors  seemed  to  be  completely  separated  in  the  minds  of  the 
scholars.  At  the  times  of  the  Greeks  and  the  Romans  there  was 
little,  if  any,  link  made  between  brain  and  mind.  Scholars  at- 
tributed man's  special  achievements  to  other  factors  than  excel- 
lence of  brain  structure  and  its  use. 

After  the  discovery  of  man's  complicated  and  complex  brain 
and  the  clinical  correlation  between  brain  injury  and  effects  on 
man's  performance,  the  brain  and  mental  factors  began  to  be 
related  to  one  another.  As  descriptions  of  man's  brain  became 
more  and  more  exact  and  clinical  correlations  increased  suffi- 
ciently in  numbers,  new  investigations  on  the  relationships  be- 
tween brain  size  and  intelligence  in  Homo  sapiens  were  started. 
The  early  work  is  summarized  by  Donaldson.' 


In  the  late  1700's  and  the  early  1800's  the  expansion  of  the 
whahng  industry  offered  many  opportunities  for  examination 
of  these  interesting  mammals.  Figures  3  and  4  are  dramatic  ex- 
amples of  the  state  of  the  industry  in  the  late  eighteenth  and 
early  nineteenth  centuries. 

One  of  the  earliest  drawings  of  the  complex  brain  of  one  of 
the  cetacea  is  that  of  Gottfried  Reinhold  Trediramus  in  1818 
(Fig.  5).  This  is  an  anterior  view  of  the  brain  of  the  common 
porpoise  Phocaena  phocaena.  This  is  one  of  the  earliest  pictures 
showing  the  complexity  of  the  fissuration  and  the  large  numbers 
of  gyri  and  sulci. 

By  the  year  1843  the  size  of  the  brain  of  whales  was  being  re- 
lated to  the  total  size  of  the  body.  The  very  large  brains  of  the 
large  whales  were  reduced  in  importance  by  considering  their 
weight  in  a  ratio  to  the  weight  of  the  total  body.  This  type  of 
reasoning  was  culminated  with  a  long  series  of  quantitative 
measures  published  by  Eugene  Dubois  {Bulletins  de  la  SocietS 
d' Anthropologic  de  Paris,  Ser.  4,  VIII  [1897],  337-376). 

Descriptions  from  those  of  Hunter  and  Tyson  onwards  agree 
that,  in  absolute  size,  the  brains  are  as  large  and  larger  than 
those  of  man.  All  were  agreed  that  the  smaller  whales,  i.e.,  the 
dolphins  and  porpoises,  have  very  large  brains  with  relation  to 
their  body  size.  It  was  argued,  therefore,  with  respect  to  the 
dolphin,  "this  creature  is  of  more  than  ordinary  wit  and  ca- 
pacity." (Robert  Hamilton,  The  Natural  History  of  the  Ordi- 
nary Cetacea  or  Whales,  p.  66,  in  Sir  William  Jardine,  The 
Naturalist's  Library,  volume  7,  Edinburgh,  1843.) 

Tiedemann's  drawings  of  the  brain  of  Delphinus  del  phis  and 
of  Delphinus  phocaena  were  published  by  H.  G.  L.  Reichenbach 
in  his  Anatomia  Mammalium  in  1845.  The  four  drawings  are 
shown  in  Figure  6.  These  drawings  show  the  improved  aware- 
ness of  the  complexities  of  these  large  brains  in  regard  to  cere- 
bral cortex,  the  cerebellum,  and  the  cranial  nerves.  Correlations 
between  the  structure  of  this  brain  and  the  behavior  of  the 


animal  possessing  it,  were  (and  are)  woefully  lacking.  The  only 
behavioral  accounts  were  those  of  whalers  hunting  these 
animals.  Hunters  tend  to  concentrate  on  the  offensive  and  de- 
fensive maneuvers  of  the  animal,  and  can  give  useful  informa- 
tion for  other  kinds  of  evaluation  of  the  animal's  behavior  and 
presumed  intelligence. 

In  1787  John  Hunter,  writing  in  the  Philosophical  Transac- 
tioi7s  of  the  Royal  Society  of  London  (LXXVII,  423-424),  said 
the  following:  "The  size  of  the  Brain  differs  much  in  different 
genera  of  this  tribe,  and  likewise  in  the  proportion  it  bears  to  the 
bulk  of  the  animal.  In  the  Porpoise,  I  believe,  it  [the  proportion] 
is  largest,  and  perhaps  in  that  respect  comes  nearest  to  the  hu- 
man . . . 

"The  brain  is  composed  of  cortical  and  medullary  substances, 
very  distinctly  marked;  the  cortical  being,  in  colour,  like  the 
tubular  substance  of  a  kidney;  the  medullary,  very  white.  These 
substances  are  nearly  in  the  same  proportion  as  in  the  human 
brain  .  .  .The  thalami  themselves  are  large;  the  corpora  striata 
small ;  the  crura  of  the  fornix  are  continued  along  the  windings 
of  the  ventricles,  much  as  in  the  human  subject." 

Flatau  and  Jacobsohn  in  1899  wrote,  "the  large  brain  of  the 
Porpoise  is  one  of  the  smallest  in  the  Cetacean  Order  in  which 
the  organ  attains  to  a  much  greater  absolute  size  than  any 

In  1902  G.  Elliot  Smith  wrote  of  the  brain  of  a  species  of 
dolphin  called  "Delphinus  tursio"  (which  may  be  the  modern 
Tursiops  truncatus) :  "This  brain  is  larger  and  correspondingly 
richer  in  sulci  than  that  of  the  porpoise:  but  the  structure  of  the 
two  organs  is  essentially  the  same."  His  drawings  are  shown  in 
Figures  7  and  8.  He  said  further,  "the  brains  of  the  Beluga  and 
all  the  dolphins  closely  resemble  that  of  the  porpoise." 

Smith  summarizes  the  discussion  of  the  huge  size  of  the 
whale's  brain.  "The  apparently  extraordinary  dimensions  of  the 
whale's  brain  cannot  therefore  be  considered  unusual  phe- 


nomena,  because  this  enormous  extent  of  the  cerebral  cortex  to 
receive  and  'store'  impressions  of  such  vast  sensory  surfaces  be- 
comes a  condition  of  survival  of  the  animal. 

"The  marvelous  complexity  of  the  surface  of  the  cerebrum  is 
the  direct  result  of  its  great  size.  In  order,  apparently,  that  the 
cerebral  cortex  may  be  efficiently  nourished  and  at  the  same  time 
be  spared  to  as  great  a  degree  as  possible  the  risk  of  vascular  dis- 
turbances [such  as  would  be  produced  by  large  vessels  passing 
into  it],  its  thickness  does  not  appreciably  increase  in  large 
animals.  [He  then  quotes  Dubois'  figures  showing  that  the 
whale's  cortex  is  the  same  thickness  as  that  of  the  human.]  Such 
being  the  case,  it  naturally  results  that  the  increased  bulk  of  cor- 
tex in  large  animals  can  only  be  packed  by  becoming  thrown 
into  increasing  number  of  folds,  separated  by  corresponding 
large  number  of  sulci."* 

In  regard  to  communication  between  individual  whales, 
Scammon  in  1874  wrote  the  following:  "It  is  said  that  the  Cacha- 
lots [Sperm  Whales]  are  endowed  with  the  faculty  of  communi- 
cating with  each  other  in  times  of  danger,  when  miles . . .  distant. 
If  this  be  true,  the  mode  of  communication  rests  instinctively 
within  their  own  contracted  brains.'"  Let  us  not  forget  that 
Scammon  was  talking  about  the  mammal  with  the  largest 
known  brain  on  this  planet.  Instinct  as  the  sole  cause  of  com- 
munication with  a  brain  this  size  seems  rather  improbable.  This 
brain  is  not  any  longer  considered  "contracted."  Both  of  these 
statements  illustrate  an  authoritative  view  of  that  time.  If  one 
peruses  the  paper  by  Tokuzo  Kojima,  "On  the  Brain  of  the 
Sperm  Whale"  (in  the  Scientific  Reports  of  the  Whales  Re- 
search Institute,  Tokyo,  VI,  1951,  49-72),  one  can  obtain  a 
modern  clear  view  of  this  brain.  The  largest  one  that  he  ob- 
tained (from  a  49-foot  sperm  whale)  was  9,200  grams.  The 
average  weight  of  the  sixteen  brains  presented  in  his  paper  is 
7,800  grams  for  average  body  lengths  of  50  feet.  (The  brain 
weight  per  foot  of  body  length  varied  from  118  to  187  grams 


per  foot,  averaging  157;  man's  ratio  averages  about  250  grams 
per  foot.) 

In  the  literature  of  the  time  of  Scammon,  the  scholars  failed  to 
give  us  new  information  about  the  behavior  of  cetacea.  There 
seems  to  have  been  a  distinctly  ambivalent  attitude  towards  these 
animals  which  is  continued  today.  This  point  of  view  can  be 
summarized  as  follows:  the  whale  is  a  very  large  animal  with  a 
brain  larger  than  that  of  man.  This  brain  is  the  result  of  the 
huge  growth  of  its  body.  All  of  this  large  brain  is  needed  to 
control  a  large  body.  Because  these  tasks  are  so  demanding, 
there  is  not  enough  brain  substance  left  for  a  high  degree  of 
intelligence  to  develop.  Thus  the  large  brain  cannot  give  the 
degree  of  intellectual  capability  that  man  has. 

As  an  example  of  man's  attitudes  to  cetaceans,  consider  the 
case  of  the  U.  S.  Fisheries  Bureau  Economic  Circular  No.  38, 
of  November  6,  191 8,  by  Lewis  Radcliffe,  entitled  "Whales  and 
Porpoises  as  Food."  Roy  Chapman  Andrews  is  quoted  as  saying 
that  hump-backed  whale  meat  is  the  best  of  the  larger  cetaceans 
but  that  porpoise  and  dolphin  meat  is  even  better  eating  than 
that  of  the  larger  whale.  The  composition  of  die  whale  meat  is 
given  as  30%  protein,  6%  fat,  and  less  than  2%  ash.  From  a 
hump-back  whale  one  obtains  six  tons  of  meat,  from  a  Sei  Whale, 
five  tons,  and  from  a  Finback,  eight  tons.  Directions  are  given 
to  remove  the  connective  tissue  between  the  blubber  and  the 
muscle  to  avoid  the  oily  taste.  For  those  who  are  interested,  the 
paper  includes  twenty-two  whale  meat  recipes  and  ten  porpoise 
meat  recipes. 

It  can  well  be  imagined,  if  we  ever  do  communicate  with 
whales,  dolphins,  or  porpoises,  the  kind  of  reception  that  this 
sort  of  literature  will  receive  from  the  cetaceans. 

The  limited  point  of  view  of  the  whales  as  "dumb  beasts" 
neglects  the  adaptations  that  have  taken  place  in  non-mam- 
malian forms  with  very  much  smaller  brains  but  with  compara- 
ble bulk  of  body.  The  60-foot  whale  shark,  a  plankton  eater, 


and  like  the  rest  of  the  sharks  a  water-breather,  has  a  bulk  of 
body  comparable  to  that  of  the  larger  whales.  It  has  a  large 
brain  cavity  but  a  very  small  brain  in  a  small  part  of  this  large 
cavity.  (It  is  very  difficult  to  find  the  weight  of  these  brains  to 
compare  with  that  of  the  cetacea  and  other  mammals.)  The 
problem  of  brain  weight  versus  body  weight  versus  intelligence 
is  most  clearly  expressed  by  Gerhardt  von  Bonin  in  his  paper  in 
the  Journal  of  General  Psychology  (1937).'  He  gives  a  very  ex- 
tensive table  for  mammals,  their  brain  weight,  their  body 
weight,  and  the  values  of  2  parameters  for  their  specification. 
He  then  states,  "it  is  clear  from  all  that  has  been  said  above  that 
the  figures  given  here  are  nothing  but  a  description  of  facts,  a 
description  which,  in  the  mathematical  sense  of  the  term,  is  the 
'best'  one.  It  does  not  pretend  to  make  any  enunciation  about 
the  relation  of  intelligence  and  brain  weight.  For  that  purpose 
we  need  a  much  broader  psychological  basis  than  we  have  at 

"Former  attempts  to  analyze  the  relations  between  body 
weight  and  brain  weight  suffer  from  three  deficits:  (i)  they 
presuppose  a  correlation  between  intelligence  and  brain  weight, 
(2)  they  make  suppositions  about  the  intelligence  of  animals 
which  are  unproven,  and  (3)  they  are  based  on  a  conception  of 
cortical  function  which  can  no  longer  be  considered  valid  .  .  . 
There  is  a  close  correlation  between  the  logarithms  of  brain  and 
body  weight,  and  this  co-relation  is  linear.  Brain  weight  in- 
creases as  the  0.655th  power  of  body  weight.  The  value  of  the 
cephalization  co-efficient  k  differs  from  species  to  species. 
Whether  or  not  this  is  an  indicatio7i  of  the  intelligence  of 
animals  must  he  left  to  the  psychologists  to  answer." 

One  of  the  problems  that  the  whales  have,  as  compared  to, 
say,  the  large  shark,  is  breathing  air  while  living  in  the  sea.  This 
requires  that  these  animals  reach  the  air-water  interface  rela- 
tively frequently — at  least  every  one  hour  and  a  half  for  the 
bottlenose  whale  (Hyperoodon),  three-quarters  of  an  hour  for 


the  Sperm  Whale  {Physeter  catadon),  and  every  six  minutes  for 
Tur slops  truncatus.  This  puts  very  stringent  requirements  on  the 
relationship  of  the  whales  to  other  events  within  the  sea.  Each 
whale  must  know  where  the  surface  of  the  sea  is  at  each  instant 
and  compute  his  future  actions  so  that  when  he  does  run  out  of 
air  he  is  near  the  surface.  He  is  essentially  a  surface-to-depth  and 
depth-to-surface  oriented  animal.  He  must  travel  at  high  speed 
at  times  in  order  to  recapture  enough  air  to  continue  whatever 
he  is  doing  under  the  surface.  This  means  that  he  must  calcu- 
late his  chances  of  obtaining  a  good  breath  of  air  during  rain 
storms  and  similar  situations.  He  can  be  violently  thrown 
around  at  the  surface  unless  he  comes  up  in  the  trough  rather 
than  at  the  crest  of  the  wave.  Such  calculations  probably  require 
an  exercise  of  something  more  than  just  "instinct." 

Water-breathing  animals,  on  the  other  hand,  have  no  need  for 
such  calculations.  If  the  surface  gets  rough,  they  move  down- 
ward and  stay  there.  The  required  maneuvers  are  very  much 
simpler  and  the  amount  of  computation  is  very  much  less. 

This  requirement  for  die  whales  implies  that  the  information 
coming  from  every  one  of  the  senses,  not  just  the  skin,  needs  to 
be  correlated  very  rapidly  and  in  complex  patterning  to  allow 
the  animals  to  predict  their  future  course  safely  and  accurately. 
It  also  requires  the  use  of  large  amounts  of  information  from 

The  predators  of  the  sea,  other  than  the  whales  themselves, 
make  life  in  the  sea  rather  a  complex  business  for  mammals.  The 
very  large  sharks  can  and  do  attack  whales,  dolphins,  and  por- 
poises. At  times  such  attacks  are  by  overwhelming  numbers  of 
sharks  on  a  relatively  small  number  of  dolphins.  All  of  the  older 
animals  in  our  experience  have  at  least  one  shark  bite  on  them — 
the  younger  animals  are  protected  by  the  older  ones  and  most  of 
them  are  not  so  dramatically  scarred. 

The  whales,  in  turn,  must  track  their  own  prey  in  order  to 
obtain  food.  With  the  single  known  exception  of  Orca,  none  of 


their  predators  are  air-breathers.  In  general,  the  whales'  diet 
consists  of  fish,  squid,  or  other  water-breathing  organisms  of  the 

A  scientific  assessment  of  the  position  of  these  animals  in  the 
competitive  environment  of  the  sea  is  not  yet  fully  evaluated 
quantitatively.  Any  pronouncement  of  the  requirements  in  re- 
gard to  new  complex  adaptations  to  new  complicated  situations 
and  hence  the  evaluation  of  intelligence  of  these  animals  at  this 
time  is  premature  and  presumptuous.  The  whole  issue  of  the 
meaning  and  the  use  of  these  large  brains  is  still  very  much  un- 
known. As  I  say  in  Ma?i  and  Dolphin^  I  am  espousing  a  plea 
for  an  open-minded  attitude  with  respect  to  these  animals.  It 
would  be  presumptuous  to  assume  that  we  at  the  present  time 
can  know  how  to  measure  their  intelligence  or  their  intellectual 
capacity.  The  usual  behavioral  criteria  used  in  evaluation  of  in- 
telligence of  other  animals  are  obviously  inapplicable  to  a  mam- 
mal living  in  the  sea.  As  McBride  and  Hebb*  so  clearly  stated, 
they  cannot  place  the  dolphin  in  any  sort  of  intellectual  com- 
parative intelligence  scale;  they  did  not  know  the  appropriate 
experimental  questions  to  ask  in  order  to  compare  the  dolphins 
with  the  chimpanzees,  for  example.  Comparing  a  handed- 
mammal  with  a  flippered-mammal,  each  of  which  lives  in  an 
entirely  separate  and  distinctive  environment,  is  a  very  difficult 
intellectual  task  even  for  Homo  sapiens. 

In  pursuing  possible  measures  of  intellectual  and  intelligent 
capacity,  what  line  should  one  pursue  ?  I  explored  this  question 
somewhat  in  Man  and  Dolphin,  but  wish  to  summarize  and  ex- 
tend it  here  in  this  discussion.  The  invariants  that  we  are  seek- 
ing somehow  do  not  seem  to  be  as  concrete  as  "tool-making  and 
tool-using  ability"  by  means  of  the  hands  which  has  been  one  of 
the  major  alleged  criteria  for  human  adaptation  and  success. 
The  chimpanzee  and  the  gorilla  have  the  hands  but  they  do 
not  have  the  brains  to  back  up  the  use  of  the  hands.  Man  has 
both  the  hands  and  the  brain.  Thus  we  can  quite  simply  and 


concretely  contrast  the  performance  of  the  large  brains  of  man 
with  his  hands  to  the  smaller  brains  of  the  primates  with  their 
hands.  When  we  consider  the  whales,  we  seem  obsessed,  as  it 
were,  with  the  necessity  of  our  own  nature  to  look  for  an  analog 
of  the  hand  and  the  manipulative  ability.  May  it  not  be  better  to 
find  a  more  general  principle  than  just  handedness  and  its  use  ? 

I  suggest  that  we  think  more  in  terms  of  a  physiologically  ap- 
propriate set  of  more  general  mechanisms  which  may  subsume 
several  other  human  functions  under  the  same  principle.  It 
seems  to  me  that  we  must  look  for  abilities  to  develop  gen- 
eralized dexterity  of  use  for  certain  kinds  of  end  purposes  for 
any  or  all  muscular  outputs  from  the  central  nervous  system.  If 
there  is  a  task  to  be  done,  such  as  lifting  a  stone,  whether  in 
water  or  air,  a  given  animal  may  turn  it  over  with  his  foot,  with 
his  flipper,  with  his  hand,  with  his  tail,  or  with  any  other  body 
part  with  which  he  could  obtain  a  purchase  on  the  stone.  The 
end  task  is  turning  over  the  stone,  to  obtain  food  or  whatever. 
It  makes  little  difference  what  kind  of  muscular  equipment  he 
uses  just  so  he  uses  it  appropriately. 

Let  me  illustrate  with  a  more  complex  example  seen  in  our 
own  laboratory.  A  baby  dolphin  was  being  nursed  in  a  small 
tank  artificially.  It  apparently  needed  the  constant  attention  of 
a  human  attendant.  Its  mother  had  not  been  caught  with  it. 
After  several  days  it  discovered  that  if  it  banged  on  the  bottom 
of  the  tank  with  its  flipper  in  a  rhythmic  fashion  it  could  bring 
the  humans  from  the  other  room.  (We  heard  a  loud  thumping 
sound  transmitted  from  a  hydrophone  in  its  tank.)  Previous  to 
this  it  attempted  to  bring  the  humans  from  the  other  room  by 
whistling  the  distress  call  of  the  dolphins ;  unlike  its  mother,  the 
humans  did  not  respond  to  the  whistle.  In  a  sense  this  distress 
call  is  in  his  instinctual  pattern  for  obtaining  food  and  aid  by 
other  dolphins.  The  secondary  adaptation  and  the  new  effort 
was  that  of  manipulating  the  flipper  rather  than  the  phonation 
mechanism  in  the  blowhole.  Thus  driven  by  whatever  the  in- 


stinctual  need  is,  it  tried  different  outputs  from  its  brain  and 
finally  discovered  one  which  brought  the  desired  results.  This 
ability  to  change  the  output  from  unsuccessful  ones  to  successful 
ones  seems  to  me  to  be  evidence  of  a  "higher  nervous  system" 
function.  Of  course  in  fine  gradation  and  small  differences,  the 
same  kind  of  pattern  can  be  show^n  for  smaller-brained  animals. 
It  is  the  seeking  a  new^  output,  not  necessarily  instinctually  tied 
in,  and  the  radicalness  of  the  change  of  output,  plus  the  relating 
of  many  of  the  variables  to  one  another  thus  generating  the  nev;' 
output,  that  seems  to  be  the  hallmark  of  the  large  brain.  These 
problems  are  not  single  variable  ones  with  simple  cause  and 
effect,  but  are  simultaneous  multiple  variable  ones. 

Among  the  manipulable  outputs  (muscular  groups)  I  would 
include  those  of  respiration  and  phonation.  The  dexterous  and 
finely  differentiated  use  of  these  muscles  generates  all  the  com- 
plexities of  human  speech.  As  more  of  the  physiology  and  psy- 
chology of  human  speech  are  analyzed  and  made  part  of  our 
sciences,  the  sharper  will  be  our  criteria  for  separating  man  from 
the  other  animals,  and  from  those  with  smaller  brains.  Scientific 
descriptions  of  human  speech  are  of  relatively  recent  origin. 
Scientific  descriptions  of  the  physiology  of  the  vocal  tract  are 
anything  but  a  closed  book  at  the  present  time.  The  neuro- 
anatomy and  neurophysiology  of  speech  is  in  a  relatively  primi- 
tive state  of  development  as  a  science.  With  such  a  lack  of  knowl- 
edge of  the  intimate  and  detailed  mechanisms  concerned,  it 
would  be  rather  presumptuous  to  evaluate  at  the  present  time 
their  role  in  the  measurement  and  testing  of  intelligence  and 
intellectual  capacity. 

However,  I  wish  to  point  out  that  these  factors  are  important 
in  such  an  evaluation  and  become  even  more  important  in  terms 
of  evaluating  a  species  that  is  not  human.  Thus  it  is  necessary, 
in  order  to  evaluate  the  inteUigence  of  even  the  dolphins,  much 
less  the  whales,  to  know  something  of  their  abilities  in  the  areas 
of  phonation  and  other  kinds  of  bodily  gestures  and  manipula- 


tions  and  hence  in  their  abilities  to  communicate  with  one  an- 
other. As  I  impHed  in  Man  and  Dolphin,  it  is  not  possible  to 
measure  accurately  the  intelligence  of  any  other  being  than  that 
of  a  human  being,  mainly  because  we  do  not  exchange  ideas 
through  any  known  communication  mode  with  such  beings. 

The  difficulties  of  such  understanding  as  we  can  possibly  gain 
of  the  real  situation  of  the  whales  in  the  sea  and  their  adaptation 
as  mammals  to  this  particular  environment,  can  be  illustrated  by 
their  use  of  sonic  generators  for  the  location  of  their  prey  and  of 
the  boundaries  of  their  container  by  means  of  the  perception  of 
echoes.  As  is  well  known,  the  small  mammals,  such  as  the  bat, 
use  this  mechanism  in  air."  The  bottlenose  dolphin  also  uses  this 
same  kind  of  mechanism  underwater.' " '"  Because  these  animals 
are  immersed  in  a  medium  of  a  density  and  a  sound  velocity 
comparable  to  the  density  and  sound  velocity  of  their  own  bodies, 
they  can  presumably  use  their  sonar  also  in  looking,  as  it  were, 
inside  one  another's  body.'  The  sonar  view  of  the  inside  of  the 
body  of  a  dolphin  may  possibly  be  very  instructive  to  other 
dolphins  and  possibly  even  aid  in  diagnosis  of  the  causes  of  cer- 
tain problems,  especially  of  those  of  the  baby  by  the  mother.  For 
example,  their  buoyancy  depends  upon  maintaining  their  center 
of  gravity  below  their  center  of  buoyancy;  otherwise  they  turn 
over  and  drown.  If  the  baby  develops  gas  in  stomach  #i,  he 
can  develop  problems  in  his  buoyancy  relationship  which  turn 
him  over;  however,  the  mother  dolphin  can  probably  easily  find 
out  whether  or  not  there  is  a  bubble  of  gas  in  the  baby's  stomach 
by  her  echo  ranging  abilities.  When  she  discovers  such  a  bubble, 
she  can  then  burp  the  baby  by  banging  on  the  belly  with  her 
beak.  We  have  seen  such  operations  take  place  in  our  tanks. 
Here  is  another  instance  of  the  animal  using  a  given  output, 
coupled  with  the  proper  input,  to  diagnose  a  problem  and  to 
manipulate  other  outputs  in  the  solution  of  that  problem.  How 
much  of  this  is  labeled  "instinctual,"  i.e.,  "unlearned,"  is  purely  a 
matter  of  intellectual  taste. 


In  the  sea  it  is  necessary  to  use  sonic  mechanisms  for  sightings 
and  recognition.  If  one  goes  into  the  sea  one  realizes  that  one's 
range  of  vision  even  under  the  best  of  circumstances  is  rarely 
beyond  lOO  feet  and  most  of  the  time  is  less  than  that  even  near 
the  brilliantly  lit  surface  of  the  tropical  seas.  With  sonic  means, 
one's  range  is  extended  up  to  several  miles  under  the  best  of 
circumstances  and  under  the  worst  to  a  few  hundred  feet. 

Recently  we  have  obtained  evidence  that  shows  that  the 
dolphins  communicate  most  of  their  information  in  the  band  of 
frequencies  extending  from  about  8  kilocycles  to  20  kilocycles 
by  means  of  whistles  and  sonic  clicks."  However,  as  shown  by 
Schevill  and  Lawrence,  they  can  hear  sounds  at  least  to  120  kilo- 
cycles'' and  as  shown  by  Kellogg  can  produce  sounds  at  least 
to  170  kilocycles.'"  We  have  recently  been  investigating  the 
higher  frequency  bands  in  these  animals  and  have  reliable 
evidence  that  they  can  hear  at  least  to  200  kilocycles  and  can 
produce  sounds  to  at  least  200  kilocycles.'  "  With  the  proper 
electronic  equipment  one  can  listen  to  the  nearer  portions  of  the 
upper  band  and  quickly  determine  that  they  can  transmit  in 
these  bands  without  the  necessity  of  transmitting  in  the  (lower 
frequency)  communication  band.  The  high  frequency  informa- 
tion is  broadcast  in  a  narrow  beam  off  the  front  of  the  beak  as 
was  first  detected  by  Kenneth  Norris.'* 

In  these  bands  we  find  that  they  can  produce  musical  tones 
or  individual  clickings  or  hissing-like  noises.  Recently  we  have 
found  that  an  emotionally  upset  animal  threatens  other  animals 
and  humans  by  productions  of  very  large  amounts  of  energy 
both  in  the  sonic  communication  band  and  in  the  ultrasonic 
bands.  Recently  we  have  had  the  opportunity  of  working  with 
an  old  bull  of  450  pounds  weight  who  is  so  old  his  teeth  have 
been  ground  down  flat.  In  terms  of  his  skeleton,  he  is  the  most 
massive  animal  we  have  ever  seen.  When  he  is  irritated,  his 
"barks"  have  sizable  amounts  of  energy  from  about  0.5  to  at 
least  300  kilocycles.  He  is  also  capable  of  transmitting  in  bands 


between  lOO  to  300  kilocycles  without  transmitting  anything  in 
the  band  from  8  kilocycles  to  20  kilocycles  in  a  narrow  beam 
straight  ahead  of  his  body.  When  he  is  upset  by  the  activities  of 
a  younger  male,  they  face  one  another  and  blast  at  one  another 
with  short  barks  of  this  sort,  meanwhile  "threatening"  by  open- 
ing their  mouths. 

Since  they  live  immersed  in  an  acoustic  world  quite  strange  to 
us,  we  have  great  difficulty  in  appreciating  the  full  life  of  these 
animals  with  respect  to  one  another  and  their  environment. 
From  birth  they  are  constantly  bombarded  with  signals  from  the 
other  animals  of  the  same  species  and  by  echoes  from  the  envi- 
ronment which  they  can  apparently  use  very  efficiently.  Their 
ultrasonic  (to  us)  emissions  are  not  merely  "sonar,"  but  are  inter- 
personal and  even  emotional.  These  animals  are  not  inanimate, 
cold  pieces  of  sonar  apparatus.  They  use  their  ultrasounds  and 
their  high-pitched  sounds  interpersonally  with  fervor  in  every- 
thing they  do.'" 

We  have  demonstrated  that  the  dolphins  are  quite  capable  of 
using  vocal  outputs  as  a  demand  for  further  rewards  or  for 
surcease  from  punishment.  Their  ability  in  the  vocal  sphere  is 
quite  sophisticated.  In  addition  to  the  ultrasonic  matters  men- 
tioned above,  their  sonic  performance,  when  in  close  contact 
with  man,  is  astonishing.  In  1957  I  discovered  their  ability  to 
produce  sounds  similar  to  our  speech  sounds.'"  During  the  last 
two  years  we  have  had  many  opportunities  to  pursue  further 
observations  in  this  area.  This  emerging  ability  seems  to  be  an 
adaptation  to  a  new  environment  which  includes  Man."  They 
quickly  discover  that  they  can  obtain  various  kinds  of  rewards 
by  making  what  we  now  call  "humanoid  emissions."  When 
they  make  a  sound  which  sounds  similar  to  a  human  syllable  or 
word,  we  express  our  pleasure  by  rewarding  the  animals  in 
various  ways.  We  have  been  exploring  what  some  of  these  re- 
wards are  in  order  to  elicit  further  such  behavior  under  better 


TS      >- 

<U      tu 

c  c  G  t:  jii  ^ 

tJ      C3      <u      O      rt 




-    ^    rj    ;:3  <« 

y     g     rt     w  ^     3 

J-H        CO       c/5       4_) 




.S     "^ 

^    <"  S  _S    i:;    J= 

^  '-M  ^  -^  _rt  ^ 

S°  -  " 

u    «-> 

ti  ^  -^  -^ 


>    g 





en  _c 

^  _c 



<u  -rj  13  i;     <u     « 

-^  2  G  «  -^  .S 

(D     ^  =5  _G  -G 

^  '^       r^       O 

■^  .s  :£  jj  c  '^ 

-Q     G  "T   -^     IJ     5 

M   "^  £  "^  "1=1  -^ 

^  •-  5  'S 

/-I      TO  (U 

i3    G  o     o 

V      TO 

O       lU      lu 

■=;  ^  -^ 

^  G  ^ 

to  .O  r3 

2  '  IJO  (L) 

flj  1-1  :^ 

1^    ^ 




s  s 


tJO  'G    -r-J      rt    '-^ 

G  _^  TD     W)   ^  ^ 

^-G'Su,'^—     S"-" 

>^      3    t!     >  u  w 

"^     ii     G  iG  -S  § 

i-H  >  t;  iJ 

(U     u  ?  J3  "-" 

^  -s  ^ 

<o  — 



2  -^  ""   ^  - 

P  G  ij  _2r"  '^ 

"     O  -g     G 




TO      >■      (11 



<u  ^ 


S  H  3 

;2      jj     ■■■ 

rs      n     G 

~C       rrt 

ex,  o   a 

"^  S  "3 

c  >,  <u 

^'  ^  « 

<u    O 
o    o 

X  -S 

^    =^ 

o  ^ 
6  .S- 
'-'  "^ 

o  ! 

O     bJQ 

U      p 

u    o 

too     Oh 

c^     to 

6  ^  ^ 

12    -Q  Z 


t-    «    =^ 

OS     dj     3 

K^       TO 

bJO  S 


«       G 

3       !r- 



2  H  <; 

o     >> 



ijn      O 


c?    «  .2 

C      "     o 

Ul   -ii  Ji 

O  ■!-■  (y 

^  C  _G 

.  ^  ci 

rt  t/>  o 


lltdCEA:  IMphitUtuu 



Figure  6.  Early  Drawings  of  the  Brain  of  the  Dolphin  and 
of  the  Porpoise  by  Tiedemann. 

These  drawings  were  reproduced  by  H.  G.  L.  Reichenbach  in  his 
Anatomia  Mammalium  in  1845.  These  are  more  accurate  renditions  and 
show  the  lateral  expansion  of  these  fine  brains.  (Courtesy  of  the  Library 
of  Congress,  Washington,  D.C.) 


Figure  7.  The  First  20th-century  Drawing  of  a  Dolphin  Brain  (G.  Elliot  Smith, 

Lateral  view.  The  proportions  are  excellent,  as  are  the  gyri  and  sulci.  Smith 
gives  the  species  as  Delphinus  tursio;  this  probably  corresponds  to  the  modern 
Tursiops  truncatus  or  bottlenose  dolphin.  This  brain  closely  resembles  that  of 
Tursiops  shown  in  photos  in  reference  7.  Langworthy's  1931  drawings  ('Tor- 
poise")  are  also  similar  (Brain,  54,  225,  1931). 

'    5 






Figure  8.  Mesial  View  of  Same  Brain  as  in  Figure  7. 

We  demonstrated  that,  like  other  animals,  the  monkey,  the 
rat,  etc.,  these  animals  can  be  rewarded  by  stimulating  the 
proper  places  in  their  brains."  '"  In  a  recent  series  of  experiments 
we  have  been  establishing  the  controls  necessary  to  understand- 
ing what  brain  rewards  mean  in  terms  of  natural  physiology. 
We  have  demonstrated  quite  formally  that  rubbing  the  skin  of 
these  animals  with  our  hands  is  a  rewarding  experience  to  them; 
they  will  seek  it  vocally  and  by  body  gestures  and  give  certain 
kinds  of  performance  in  order  to  obtain  this  reward. 

Recently  we  have  found  that  "vocal  transactions"  are  a  reward 
to  these  animals.''  (See  below  for  human  analogies  in  the 
child.)  This  seems  to  be  one  of  the  basic  factors  in  our  being  able 
to  elicit  humanoid  emissions.  The  vocal  transactions  are  started 
by  a  human  shouting  some  words  over  the  water  of  the  tank  in 
which  the  animal  is  residing.  A  single  word  may  be  used  or 
many  words — it  makes  little  difference.  Eventually  the  animal 
in  the  tank  will  raise  his  blowhole  out  of  water  and  make  some 
sort  of  a  humanoid  emission  or  whistle  or  clicks  in  a  delphinese 
fashion.  If  the  human  immediately  replies  with  some  word  or 
words,  the  animal  may  immediately  respond,  the  human 
answers,  and  a  vocal  transaction  is  under  way.  We  have  shown 
that  dolphins  naturally  do  this  with  one  another  in  both  their 
whistle  and  clicking  spheres,  and  sometimes  do  it  in  the  barking 
sphere."  How  much  of  this  is  "instinctual"  and  how  much  is  not, 
there  is  no  way  of  knowing  at  the  present  time. 

A  physical  analysis  of  such  vocal  transactions  shows  them  to 
be  formally  quite  as  complex  as  the  vocal  transactions  between 
human  beings.  In  other  words,  the  dolphin  may  say  one  word 
or  a  syllable-like  emission,  or  many,  one  right  after  the  other,  as 
may  the  humans.  If  the  human  says  one  word,  the  dolphin  may 
say  one,  two,  three,  or  four,  and  if  the  human  says  one,  two, 
three,  or  four,  the  dolphin  may  say  one.  There  is  no  necessary 
master-slave  kind  of  relationship  in  the  delphinic  emissions. 

In  our  early  reports  we  gave  examples  which  were  single 


words  which  sounded  like  the  words  that  the  human  made." ' 
This  presentation  led  to  misunderstandings  among  our  sci- 
entific colleagues.  It  looked  as  if  the  animals  were  doing  a  slavish 
tape-recorder  rendition  of  what  we  were  doing  in  a  fashion 
similar  to  that  of  a  parrot  or  a  Mynah  bird.  All  along  we  have 
known  that  the  dolphins  did  not  do  such  a  slavish  job  and  were 
obviously  doing  a  much  more  complicated  series  of  actions.  We 
are  just  beginning  to  appreciate  how  to  analyze  and  what  to 
analyze  in  these  transactions.  As  I  stated  in  Man  and  Dolphin 
about  10%  of  these  emissions  sound  like  human  speech.  In  other 
words,  the  dolphin  is  "saying"  far  more  than  we  have  trans- 
mitted to  the  scientific  community  to  date.  We  hesitate  to  say 
anything  more  about  this  until  we  begin  to  understand  what 
is  going  on  in  greater  detail.  We  are  making  progress  slowly. 

Let  me  then  make  an  appeal  to  you — a  long  appeal  to  your 
logical  and  rational  views  of  man  and  cetaceans.  Here  I  review 
the  above  points  in  more  general  terms,  and  develop  a  plea  for  a 
new  science — a  new  discipline  combining  the  best  of  science 
with  the  best  of  the  humanities. 

Several  old  questions  should  be  revived  and  asked  again  with 
a  new  attitude,  with  more  modern  techniques  of  investigation 
and  with  more  persistence.  It  may  take  twenty  years  or  more  to 
develop  good  answers;  meanwhile  the  intellectual  life  of  man 
will  profit  in  the  undertaking.  There  is  something  exciting  and 
even  at  times  disturbing  in  this  quest."'  The  bits  and  pieces  may 
have  started  before  historical  times.  In  each  age  of  man  a  new 
fragment  was  allowed  to  be  recorded  and  passed  on  to  subse- 
quent generations.  Each  generation  judged  and  rejudged  the 
evidence  from  the  older  sources  on  the  basis  of  its  then  cur- 
rent beliefs  and  on  the  basis  of  its  new  experiences,  if  any.  At 
times  good  evidence  was  attenuated,  distorted,  and  even  de- 
stroyed in  the  name  of  the  then  current  dogma. 

Today  we  have  similar  problems;  our  current  behefs  blind 
us,  too.  Evidence  right  before  the  eye  can  be  distorted  by  the 


eye  of  the  beholder  quite  as  powerfully  as  it  has  been  in  previous 
ages  of  man.  We  can  only  hope  that  we  have  achieved  greater 
insight  and  greater  objectivity  than  some  of  our  ancestors.  The 
winds  and  currents  of  bias  and  prejudice  blow  hard  and  run 
deep  in  the  minds  of  men.  In  one's  own  mind  these  factors  are 
difficult  to  see,  and  when  seen,  difficult  to  attenuate  and  to  allow 
for  their  influence.  If  at  times  I  scold  my  own  species,  do  not 
take  it  too  personally;  I  am  scolding  myself  more  than  you. 

You  can  see  by  now  that  I  believe  that  some  of  the  answers  to 
the  quest  are  in  our  own  minds.  We  must  develop,  imaginatively 
and  humbly,  numbers  of  alternative  hypotheses  to  expand  the 
testable  areas  of  the  intellect  and  bring  to  the  investigation  new 
mental  instruments  to  test  and  to  collect  facts  germane  to  our 

To  ask  about  the  intelligence  of  another  species,  we  somehow 
first  ask:  how  large  and  well-developed  is  its  brain?  Somewhat 
blindly  we  link  brain  size  (a  biological  fact)  to  intelligence  (a 
behavioral  and  psychological  concept).  We  know,  in  the  case  of 
our  own  species,  that  if  the  brain  fails  to  develop,  intelligence 
also  fails  to  develop. 

How  do  we  judge  in  our  own  species  that  intelligence  de- 
velops or  fails  to  develop?  We  work  with  the  child  and  care- 
fully observe  its  performances  of  common  tasks  and  carefully 
measure  its  acquisition  of  speech  quantitatively.  We  measure 
(among  other  factors)  size  of  word  vocabulary,  adequacy  of 
pronunciation,  lengths  of  phrases  and  sentences,  appropriateness 
of  use,  levels  of  abstraction  achieved,  and  the  quality  of  the 
logical  processes  used.  We  also  measure  speed  of  grasping  new 
games  with  novel  sets  of  rules  and  strategy;  games  physical 
and/or  games  verbal  and  vocal. 

Normal  mental  growth  patterns  of  human  children  have  been 
measured  extensively  in  both  performance  and  in  vocal  speech 
acquisition.  I  have  taken  the  liberty  of  relating  these  to  the 
normal  growth  of  brain  weight  of  children. 



Threshold  Quantities  for  Human  Acquisition  of 

Speech:  Age  and  Brain  Weight^ 


Brain  weight' 

Speech  stages^ 



(first  appearances) 



Responds  to  human  voice,  cooing, 
and  vocalizes  pleasure. 



Vocal  play.  Eagerness  and  dis- 
pleasure expressed  vocally. 



Imitates  sounds. 



First  word. 



Imitates  syllables  and  words. 
Second  word. 



Vocabulary  expands  rapidly. 



Names  objects  and  pictures. 



Combines  words  in  speech. 



Uses  pronouns,  understands 
prepositions,  uses  phrases 
and  sentences. 

^  Lilly,  John  C.  Man  and  Dolphin:  A  Developing  Relationship.  London:  Victor  Gol- 
lancz,  1962. 

"Boston  Children's  Hospital  data  from  1,198  records,  in  Coppoletta,  J.  M.,  and 
Wolbach,  S.  B.,  "Body  Length  and  Organ  Weights  of  Infants  and  Children,"  American 
Journal  of  Pathology,  IX  (1933),  55-70. 

^  Summarized  from  McCarthy,  Dorothea,  "Language  Development  in  Children,"  in 
Carmichael,  Leonard,  ed..  Manual  of  Child  Psychology.  New  York:  John  Wiley,  1946, 
pp.  476-581. 

Table  i  shows  relations  between  age,  brain  weight,  and  speech 
performance,  up  to  23  months,  1070  grams,  and  the  use  of  full 
sentences.  By  17  years,  the  brain  reaches  and  levels  ofl  at  1450 
grams  and  the  number  of  words,  levels  of  abstraction,  etc.,  are  so 
large  as  to  be  difficult  to  assess. 

In  these  processes,  what  are  die  minimum  necessary  but  not 
necessarily  sufficient  factors?'"  On  the  biological  side,  modern 
theory  concentrates  on  two  factors:  total  numbers  of  neurons 
and  the  number  of  interconnections  between  them.  On  the  psy- 
chological side,  modern  theory  concentrates  on  the  numbers  of 
occurrences  of  reinforced  contingencies  experienced,  the  num- 


ber  of  repetitions,  and  the  number  of  adequate  presentations 
from  the  accepted  set  of  the  consensus  known  as  "native  lan- 
guage," and  the  total  numbers  of  sets  in  the  stored  memories  at 
a  given  age.  In  addition,  of  course,  is  the  adequate  development 
of  the  transmitting  and  of  the  receiving  equipment  needed  for 
speech  and  its  ancillary  behaviors. 

On  the  biological  side,  modern  neurology  says  the  number  of 
neurons  in  the  human  brain  reaches  maximum  value  before 
birth  at  about  13  billions.  After  this  point,  the  increase  in  weight 
consists  of  increased  numbers  of  fibers,  increased  connections,  in- 
creased size  of  elements,  and  increased  efficiency  and  selectivity 
of  transmission.  Thus  the  increase  in  weight  of  the  human 
brain  from  about  400  to  1400  grams  seems  to  be  devoted  to  im- 
proving its  internal  (as  well  as  external)  communication,  stor- 
age, and  computation  networks.  As  I  have  stated  elsewhere 
{Man  and  Dolphin),  it  is  my  impression  that  there  exist  critical 
threshold  values  in  the  brain's  growth  pattern  at  which  certain 
kinds  of  performance  become  possible.  Complex  speech  acquisi- 
tion seems  related  to  brain  weights  of  800  to  1000  grams,  but  no 
smaller.  This  assumes,  of  course,  numbers  of  neurons  (lo'") 
and  numbers  of  connections  and  opportunities  for  learning  and 
time  to  learn  commonly  found  with  humans. 

The  critical  psychological  factors  in  speech  acquisition  are 
slowly  being  dug  out  and  described."^  ~  Among  these  the  most 
important  seem  to  be  a  continuous  background  of  presentations 
to  the  child  in  rewarding  circumstances  of  speech  and  its  close 
relations  to  objects,  actions,  satisfaction  of  needs,  and  persons. 
Imitation  of  one's  use  of  facial  and  vocal  apparatus  appears 
spontaneously  in  the  happy  child.  The  virtuosity  of  the  child 
as  a  mimic  is  truly  astonishing. 

I  am  also  impressed  by  evidence  for  what  I  call  the  "transac- 
tional drive."  A  bright  child  seems  to  seek  and  respond  best  to 
those  persons  who  respond  in  kind,  back  and  forth  in  exchanges 
of  sounds  and  linked  actions.  For  example,  if  one  starts  such  a 


transaction  with  a  child  of  22  months  with  a  loud  word,  if  he  is 
ready,  he  may  return  his  version  of  the  word  or  a  slight  variant; 
if  one  replies  with  another  variant  the  child  rephes  with  still  a 
third,  or  even  suddenly  with  a  new  word,  and  so  on  back  and 
forth  in  a  transactional  vocal  dance.  Or  one  may  reply  to  a  child 
who  invites  such  an  exchange  to  begin.  Such  exchanges  seem 
to  function  as  rewards  of  themselves,  and  hence  the  name, 
"transactional  drive."  This  phenomenon  is  more  than  mere  me- 
chanical slavish  mimicry.  It  seems  to  aid  in  perfecting  pronun- 
ciation, increases  vocabulary,  increases  the  bonds  with  other 
persons,  serves  to  substitute  the  "consensus-dictionary"  words 
for  the  private  baby  words,  and  is  thus  essential  to  learning  a 
language  of  one's  own  species.  It  is  thus  that  the  child  "becomes 

As  the  child  ages  and  grows,  the  exchanges  lengthen,  and  the 
time  during  which  each  member  of  the  dyad  is  quiet  while  the 
other  speaks  becomes  longer,  until  finally  for  a  half  hour  or  so, 
I  am  lecturing  and  you  are  at  least  quiet,  if  not  listening. 

How  does  all  of  this  relate  to  modern  dolphins,  porpoises,  and 
whales  ?  From  the  vast  array  of  scientific  facts  and  theories  about 
our  own  species,  a  few  of  those  which  I  feel  are  useful  in  ap- 
proaching another  species  to  evaluate  its  intelligence  are  dis- 
cussed above.  But  before  I  make  connections  there,  let  us  attenu- 
ate some  interfering  attitudes  and  points  of  view,  some  myths 
not  so  modern;  these  interfering  presumptions  can  be  stated  as 
follows : 

(i)  No  animal  has  a  language  comparable  to  a  human  language. 

(2)  No  animal  is  as  intelHgent  as  man. 

(3)  Man  can  adapt  himself  to  any  environment  quite  as  well  as  any 

(4)  Intelligence  and  intellect  can  be  expressed  only  in  the  ways  man 
expresses  or  has  expressed  them. 

(5)  All  animal  behavior  is  instinct-determined. 

(6)  None  of  man's  thought  and  behavior  is  so  determined. 


(y)  Only  man  thinks  and  plans;  animals  are  incapable  of  having  a 
mental  life. 

(8)  Philosophy  and  contemplative  and  analytic  thought  are  character- 
istic only  of  man,  not  of  any  animal. 

All  of  these  statements  stem  from  ignorance  and  anthropo- 
centricity.  For  example,  who  are  we  to  say  that  whales,  dolphins, 
and  porpoises  are  to  be  included  as  "dumb  beasts"  ?  It  would  be 
far  more  objective  and  humble  to  tell  the  truth — we  don't  know 
about  these  animals  because  we  haven't  "been  there  yet."  We 
have  not  lived  in  the  sea,  naked  and  alone,  or  even  in  mobile 
groups,  without  steel  containers  to  keep  out  the  sea  itself.  For 
purposes  of  discussion  let  us  make  the  following  assumptions 
which  push  counter  to  the  current  of  bias  running  deep  among 

(i)  Man  has  not  yet  been  willing  to  investigate  the  possibility  of  an- 
other intelligent  species. 

(2)  Whales,  dolphins,  and  porpoises  are  assumed  to  be  "dumb  beasts" 
with  litde  or  no  evidence  for  this  presumption. 

(3)  We  do  not  yet  know  very  much  about  these  animals — their  neces- 
sities, their  intelligences,  their  lives,  the  possibility  of  their  communica- 

(4)  It  is  possible  for  man  to  investigate  these  matters  objectively  with 
courage  and  perseverance. 

(5)  To  properly  evaluate  whales,  dolphins,  porpoises,  we  must  use 
everything  we  have  intellectually,  all  available  knowledge,  humanistic  as 
well  as  scientific. 

Our  best  knowledge  of  ourselves  as  a  species,  as  humans,  is  in 
the  humanities  and  in  the  budding,  growing  sciences  of  man. 
In  pursuit  of  understanding  of  the  whales,  dolphins,  and  por- 
poises, we  need,  at  least  at  the  beginning,  a  large  view  which 
is  in  the  human  sciences  and  in  the  humanities.  The  sciences  of 
animals  are  necessarily  restrictive  in  their  view,  and  hence  not 
yet  apphcable  to  our  problems. 

The  history  of  the  animal  sciences  shows  that  they  have  had 
grave  difficulties  with  the  fact  that  the  observers  are  present  and 

human.  These  sciences,  hke  physics,  chemistry,  and  biology,  play 
the  game  as  if  the  human  observer  were  not  there  and  the  sys- 
tems were  isolated  from  man.  This  is  fine  strategy  for  "man-less 
nature"  studies  and  quite  appropriate  for  such  studies. 

However,  I  submit  to  you  another  view,  for  a  science  of  man 
and  animal,  their  relationships  to  one  another.  Modern  man  and 
modern  dolphin  and  whale  may  be  best  investigated  in  the 
framework  of  a  new  science  one  might  call  "anthropo-zoology" 
or  "zoo-anthropology."  This  science  is  a  deep  study  of  man,  of 
the  animal,  of  their  mutual  relations,  present  and  potential.  In 
this  discipline  scientists  encourage  close  relations  with  the  ani- 
mal, and  study  the  developing  relation  between  man  and  so- 
called  "beast." 

For  the  last  three  years  in  the  Communication  Research  In- 
stitute^ we  have  been  pursuing  an  investigative  path  in  diis  new 
science  with  the  pair  "man  and  bottlenose  dolphin."  We  have 
encouraged  and  pursued  studies  in  classical  sciences  such  as 
neurophysiology,  animal  psychology,  anatomy,  biophysics,  and 
zoology.  We  have  also  initiated  and  pursued  this  new  science 
of  the  man  and  dolphin  relation;  these  "homo-delphic"  studies, 
if  you  will,  are  triply  demanding:  we  must  not  only  know  our 
animal  objectively  but  we  must  know  man  objectively,  and  our- 
selves subjectively.  We  cannot  fight  shy  of  involving  ourselves 
in  the  investigation  as  objects  also.  In  this  science  man,  and 
hence  one's  own  self,  are  part  of  the  system  under  investigation. 
This  is  not  an  easy  discipline.  One  must  guard  quite  as  rigor- 
ously (or  even  more  so)  against  the  pitfalls  of  wishful  thinking 
and  sensational  fantasy  as  in  other  scientific  endeavors.  This  field 
requires  a  self-candor,  an  inner  honesty,  and  a  humility  quite 
difficult  to  acquire.  But  I  maintain  that  good  science  can  be  done 
here,  that  the  field  is  a  proper  one  for  properly  trained  and  prop- 
erly motivated  investigators. 



1.  Plinius  Secundus.  Natural  History.  Ill,  Book  IX. 

2.  Aristotle.  Historia  Animalium.  Books  I-IX. 

3.  Donaldson,  Henry  H.  The  Growth  of  the  Brain.  London: 
Walter  Scott,  1895. 

4.  Smith,  G.  Elliot,  in  Royal  College  of  Surgeons  of  England, 
Museum,  Descriptive  and  Illustrated  Catalogue  of  the  Physiological 
Series  of  Comparative  Anatomy.  London:  Taylor  and  Francis,  1902, 

PP-  349. 351. 356- 

5.  Scammon,  Charles  Melville.  The  Marine  Mammals  of  the  'North- 
Western  Coast  of  North  America,  Described  and  Illustrated:  To- 
gether with  an  Account  of  the  American  W hale-Fishery.  San  Fran- 
cisco: J.  H.  Carmany,  1874,  p.  78. 

6.  von  Bonin,  Gerhardt.  "Brain- Weight  and  Body- Weight  in  Mam- 
mals," Journal  of  General  Psychology,  XVI  (1937),  379-389- 

7.  Lilly,  John  C.  Man  and  Dolphin.  Garden  City,  N.Y.:  Doubleday, 
1961;  London:  Victor  Gollancz,  1962. 

8.  McBride,  Arthur  F.,  and  Hebb,  D.  O.  "Behavior  of  the  Captive 
Bottle-Nose  Dolphin,  Tursiops  truncatus,"  Journal  of  Comparative 
and  Physiological  Psychology ,X1A  (1948),  111-123. 

9.  Griffin,  Donald  R.  Echoes  of  Bats  and  Men.  Garden  City,  N.Y.: 
Doubleday,  1959. 

10.  Kellogg,  Winthrop  N.  Porpoises  and  Sonar.  Chicago:  Univer- 
sity of  Chicago  Press,  1961. 

11.  Lilly,  John  C,  and  Miller,  Alice  M.  "Vocal  Exchanges  between 
Dolphins;  Bottlenose  Dolphins  'Talk'  to  Each  Other  with  Whistles, 
Clicks,  and  a  Variety  of  Other  Noises,"  Science,  CXXXIV  (1961), 

12.  Schevill,  William  E.,  and  Lawrence,  Barbara.  "Auditory  Re- 
sponse of  a  Bottlenosed  Porpoise,  Tursiops  truncatus,  to  Frequencies 
above  100  KC,"  Journal  of  Experimental  Zoology,  CXXIV  (1953), 

13.  Lilly,  John  C.  "Vocal  Behavior  of  the  Bottlenose  Dolphin," 
Proceedings  of  the  American  Philosophical  Society,  CVI  (1926),  520- 


14.  Norris,  Kenneth  S.,  Prescott,  John  H.,  Asa-Dorian,  Paul  V.,  and 
Perkins,  Paul.  "An  Experimental  Demonstration  of  Echo-Location 
Behavior  in  the  Porpoise,  Tursiops  truncatus  (Montagu),"  Biological 
Bulletin,  CXX  (1961),  163-176. 

15.  Lilly,  John  C.  "Interspecies  Communication,"  McGraw-Hill 
Yearbook^  of  Science  and  Technology  ig62.  New  York:  McGraw-Hill, 
1962,  pp.  279-281. 

16.  Lilly,  John  C.  "Some  Considerations  Regarding  Basic  Mecha- 
nisms of  Positive  and  Negative  Types  of  Motivations,"  American 
Journal  of  Psychiatry,  CXV  (1958),  498-504. 

17.  Lilly,  John  C.  "Some  Aspects  of  the  Adaptation  of  the  Mam- 
mals to  the  Ocean,"  in  John  Field,  ed.,  Handboo\  of  Physiology. 
Washington:  American  Physiological  Society  (in  press). 

18.  Lilly,  John  C,  and  Miller,  A.  M.  "Operant  Conditioning  of  the 
Bottlenose  Dolphin  with  Electrical  Stimulation  of  the  Brain,"  Journal 
of  Comparative  and  Physiological  Psychology,  LV  (1962),  73-79. 

19.  Lilly,  John  C.  "Some  Problems  of  Productive  and  Creative  Sci- 
entific Research  with  Man  and  Dolphin,"  Archii/es  of  General  Psy- 
chiatry (1963,  in  press). 

20.  Lilly,  John  C.  "Critical  Brain  Size  and  Language,"  Perspectives 
in  Biology  and  Medicine  (in  press). 

21.  Skinner,  Burrhus  F.  Verbal  Behavior.  New  York:  Appleton- 
Century-Crofts,  1957. 

22.  Lewis,  Morris  M.  Hotv  Children  Learn  to  Spea\.  New  York: 
Basic  Books,  1959. 

23.  Support  for  the  program  of  the  Communication  Research  In- 
stitute, St.  Thomas,  Virgin  Islands,  is  from  the  National  Institute  of 
Mental  Health  and  the  National  Institute  of  Neurological  Diseases 
and  BHndness  of  the  National  Institutes  of  Health;  from  the  Coyle 
Foundation;  from  the  Office  of  Naval  Research;  from  the  U.  S.  Air 
Force  Office  of  Scientific  Research;  and  from  private  gifts  and  con- 
tributions to  the  Communication  Research  Institute. 


William  Andrews  Clark 
Memorial  Library 
Seminar  Papers 

Editing  Donne  and  Pope.  1952. 
Problems  in  the  Editing  of  Donne's  Sermons,  by  George  R.  Potter. 
Editorial  Problems  in  Eighteenth-Century  Poetry,  by  John  Butt. 
Music  and  Literature  in  England  in  the  Seventeenth  and  Eighteenth 
Centuries.  1953. 

Poetry  and  Music  in  the  Seventeenth  Century,  by  James  E.  PhilHps. 
Some  Aspects  o£  Music  and  Literature  in  the  Eighteenth  Century, 
by  Bertrand  H.  Bronson. 
Restoration  and  Augustan  Prose.  1956. 
Restoration  Prose,  by  James  R.  Sutherland. 

The  Ironic  Tradition  in  Augustan  Prose  from  Swift  to  Johnson,  by 
Ian  Watt. 
Anglo-American  Cultural  Relations  in  the  Seventeenth  and  Eight- 
eenth Centuries.  1958. 

The  Puritans  in  Old  and  New  England,  by  Leon  Howard. 
Wilham  Byrd:  Citizen  of  the  Enlightenment,  by  Louis  B.  Wright. 
The  Beginnings  of  Autobiography  in  England,  by  James  M.  Osborn. 

Scitntific  Literature  in  Sixteenth  and  Seventeenth  Century  England. 
Enghsh  Medical  Literature  in  the  Sixteenth  Century,  by  C.  D. 

Enghsh  Scientific  Literature  in  the  Seventeenth  Century,  by  A. 
Rupert  Hall. 
Francis  Bacon's  Intellectual  Milieu.  A  Paper  delivered  by  Virgil  K. 
Whitaker  at  a  meeting  at  the  Clark  Library,  18  November  1961, 
celebrating  the  400th  anniversary  of  Bacon's  birth. 
Methods  of  Textual  Editing,  by  Vinton  A.  Dearing.  1962.